Did You Know The Trinity Is MAN-MADE?
What does the bible teach concerning the God we serve? Is He One or Multiple persons(many)??
All the scriptures will be shared to help the individual reader about God. This room is not for Debate,We are here to share God's Word in Love and in Truth. Please Refrain from personal attacks. AGAIN THIS ROOM IS FOR SINCERE SEEKERS OF THE ONE TRUE GOD. We must maintain A right spirit,and behave like true Christians edifying in the Word of God and Loving One another. Thank you for your interest in in Learning the Bible . God Bless you.
"Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4).
"God is one" (Galatians 3:20).
There is one God. There is only one God. This doctrine is central to the Bible message, for both the Old Testament and the New Testament teach it plainly and emphatically. Despite the simplicity of this message and the clarity with which the Bible presents it, many who believe in the existence of God have not understood it. Even within Christendom many people, including theologians, have not comprehended this beautiful and essential message. Our purpose is to address this problem, and to affirm and explain the biblical doctrine of the oneness of God.
Monotheism Defined
The belief in only one God is called monotheism, which comes from two Greek words: monos, meaning alone, single, one; and theos, meaning God. Anyone who does not accept monotheism can be classified as one of the following: an atheist who denies the existence of God; an agnostic - one who asserts that the existence of God is unknown and probably unknowable; a pantheist - one who equates God with nature or the forces of the universe; or a polytheist - one who believes in more than one God. Ditheism, the belief in two gods, is a form of polytheism, and so is tritheism, the belief in three gods. Among the major religions of the world, three are monotheistic: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.
Within the ranks of those labelling themselves Christian, however, there are several divergent views as to the nature of the Godhead. One view, called trinitarianism, asserts that there are three distinct persons in the Godhead - God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost - but yet one God.
Within the ranks of trinitarianism, one can discern two extreme tendencies. On the one hand, some trinitarians emphasize the unity of God without having a carefully developed understanding of what is meant by three distinct persons in the Godhead. On the other hand, other trinitarians emphasize the threeness of the trinity to the point that they believe in three self-conscious beings, and their view is essentially tritheistic.
In addition to trinitarianism, there is the doctrine of binitarianism, which does not classify the Holy Ghost as a separate person but asserts belief in two persons in the Godhead.
Many monotheists have pointed out that both trinitarianism and binitarianism weaken the strict monotheism taught by the Bible. They insist that the Godhead cannot be divided into persons and that God is absolutely one.
These believers in strict monotheism fall into two classes. One class asserts that there is only one God, but does so by denying, in one way or another, the full deity of Jesus Christ. This view was represented in early church history by the dynamic monarchians, such as Paul of Samosata, and by the Arians, led by Arius. These groups relegated Jesus to the position of a created god, subordinate god, junior god, or demigod.
The second class of true monotheists believes in one God, but further believes that the fulness of the Godhead is manifested in Jesus Christ. They believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are manifestations, modes, offices, or relationships that the one God has displayed to man. Church historians have used the terms modalism and modalistic monarchianism to describe this view as held by such early church leaders as Noetus, Praxeas, and Sabellius. (See Chapter 10 - ONENESS BELIEVERS IN CHURCH HISTORY.) In the twentieth century, those who believe in both the indivisible oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ frequently use the term Oneness to describe their belief. They also use the terms One God and Jesus Name as adjectives to label themselves, while opponents sometimes use the misleading or derogatory designations "Jesus Only" and "New Issue." (The label "Jesus Only" is misleading because to trinitarians it implies a denial of the Father and the Holy Spirit. However, Oneness believers do not deny the Father and Spirit, but rather see Father and Spirit as different roles of the One God who is the Spirit of Jesus.)
In summary, Christendom has produced four basic views of the Godhead: (1) trinitarianism, (2) binitarianism, (3) strict monotheism with a denial of the full deity of Jesus Christ, and (4) strict monotheism with an affirmation of the full deity of Jesus Christ, or Oneness.
Having surveyed the range of human beliefs about the Godhead, let us look at what the Word of God - the Bible - has to say on the subject.
The Old Testament Teaches That There Is But One God
The classic expression of the doctrine of one God is found in Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD." This verse of Scripture has become the most distinctive and important statement of faith for the Jews. They call it the Shema, after the first word of the phrase in Hebrew, and they often quote it in English as "Hear, O Israel, the LORD is our God, the LORD is one." (See also the NIV.) Traditionally, a devout Jew always tried to make this confession of faith just before death.
In Deuteronomy 6:5, God followed the announcement of the preceding verse with a command that requires total belief in and love for Him as the one and only God: "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." We should notice the importance which God attaches to Deuteronomy 6:4-5. He commands that these verses be placed in the heart (verse 6), taught to the children throughout the day (verse 7), bound on the hand and forehead (verse 8), and written on the posts and gates of houses (verse 9).
Orthodox Jews literally obey these commands today by binding tefillin (phylacteries) on their left forearms and on their foreheads when they pray, and by placing mezuzzah on their doors and gates. (Teffilin are small boxes tied to the body by leather straps, and mezuzzah are scroll-shaped containers.) Inside both types of containers are verses of Scripture handwritten in black ink by a righteous man who has observed certain purification rituals. The verses of Scripture usually are Deuteronomy 6:4-9,11:18-21, Exodus 13:8-10, and 13:14-16.
During a trip to Jerusalem, where we gathered the above information, [1] we attempted to buy tefillin. The Orthodox Jewish merchant said he did not sell tefillin to Christians because they do not believe in and have the proper reverence for these verses of Scripture. When we quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 and explained our total adherence to it, his eyes lit up and he promised to sell to us on the condition that we would treat the tefillin with care and respect. His concern shows the extreme reverence and depth of belief the Jews have for the concept of one God. It also reveals that a major reason for the Jewish rejection of Christianity throughout history is the perceived distortion of the monotheistic message.
Many other Old Testament verses of Scripture emphatically affirm strict monotheism. The Ten Commandments begin with, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3; Deuteronomy 5:7). God emphasized this command by stating that He is a jealous God (Exodus 20:5). In Deuteronomy 32:39, God said there is no other god with him. There is none like the LORD and there is no God beside Him (II Samuel 7:22; I Chronicles 17:20). He alone is God (Psalm 86:10). There are the emphatic declarations of God in Isaiah.
"Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour" (Isaiah 43:10-11).
"I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God" (Isaiah 44:6).
"Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any" (Isaiah 44:8).
"I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself" (Isaiah 44:24).
"There is none beside me. I am the LORD and there is none else" (Isaiah 45:6).
"There is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else" (Isaiah 45:21-22).
"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me" (Isaiah 46:9).
"I will not give my glory unto another" (Isaiah 48:11; see also Isaiah 42:8).
"O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth" (Isaiah 37:16).
There is only one God, who is the Creator and Father of mankind (Malachi 2:10). In the time of the Millennial Reign, there shall be only one LORD with one name (Zechariah 14:9).
In short, the Old Testament speaks of God in terms of being one. Many times the Bible calls God the Holy One (Psalm 71:22; 78:41; Isaiah 1:4; 5:19; 5:24), but never the "holy two, the holy three," or the "holy many."
A common remark by some trinitarians about the Old Testament doctrine of the oneness of God is that God only intended to emphasize His oneness as opposed to pagan deities, but that He still existed as a plurality. However, if this conjecture were true, why did not God make it clear? Why have the Jews understood not a theology of "persons" but have insisted on an absolute monotheism? Let us look at it from God's point of view. Suppose He did want to exclude any belief in a plurality in the Godhead. How could He do so using then-existing terminology? What strong words could He use to get His message across to His people? When we think about it, we will realize that He used the strongest possible language available to describe absolute oneness. In the preceding verses of Scriptures in Isaiah, we note the use of words and phrases such as "none, none else, none like me, none beside me, alone, by myself," and "one." Surely, God could not make it plainer that no plurality whatsoever exists in the Godhead. In short, the Old Testament affirms that God is absolutely one in number.
The New Testament Teaches There Is But One God
Jesus emphatically taught Deuteronomy 6:4, calling it the first of all the commandments (Mark 12:29-30). The New Testament presupposes the Old Testament teaching of one God and explicitly repeats this message many times.
"Seeing it is one God which shall justify" (Romans 3:30).
"There is none other God but one" (I Corinthians 8:4).
"But to us there is but one God, the Father" (I Corinthians 8:6).
"But God is one" (Galatians 3:20).
"One God and Father of all" (Ephesians 4:6).
"For there is one God" (I Timothy 2:5).
"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble" (James 2:19).
Again, the Bible calls God the Holy One (I John 2:20). There is one throne in heaven and One sits upon it (Revelation 4:2).
In subsequent articles we will explore New Testament monotheism in greater depth, but the above verses of Scripture are sufficient to establish that the New Testament teaches one God.
In this study you will find the whole Bible teaches a strict monotheism. God's people have always been identified with the one-God message. God chose Abraham because of his willingness to forsake the gods of his nation and his father and to worship the one true God (Genesis 12:1-8). God chastised Israel every time she began to worship other gods, and polytheistic worship was one of the main reasons that God finally sent her into captivity (Acts 7:43). The Savior came to the world through a nation (Israel) and through a religion (Judaism) in which the people had finally purged themselves of polytheism. They were thoroughly monotheistic.
Today, God still demands a monotheistic worship of Him. We in the church are heirs of Abraham by faith, and this exalted position demands that we have the same monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham (Romans 4:13-17). As Christians in the world we must never cease to exalt and declare the message that there is only one true and living God.
The Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the oneness of God and the absolute deity of Jesus Christ. The early Christians believed this great truth, and many people have adhered to it throughout history. Although in the course of history trinitarianism became the predominant doctrine in Christendom, the Scriptures do not teach it. In fact, the Bible nowhere mentions or alludes to the word trinity, the phrase "three persons in one substance," or the phrase "three persons in one God." We can explain all the Scriptures in both testaments adequately without any need to resort to the doctrine of the trinity.
Trinitarianism contradicts and detracts from important biblical teachings. It detracts from the Bible's emphasis on God's absolute oneness, and it detracts from Jesus Christ's full deity. Trinitarian doctrine as it exists today did not develop fully and the majority of Christendom did not accept it fully until the fourth century after Christ.
Here are five specific ways in which the biblical doctrine of Christian monotheism differs from the presently existing doctrine of trinitarianism. (1) The Bible does not speak of an eternally existing "God the Son;" for the Son refers only to the Incarnation. (2) The phrase "three persons in one God" is inaccurate because there is no distinction of persons in God. If "persons" indicates a plurality of personalities, wills, minds, beings, or visible bodies, then it is incorrect because God is one being with one personality, will, and mind. He has one visible body - the glorified human body of Jesus Christ. (3) The term "three persons" is incorrect because there is no essential threeness about God. The only number relevant to God is one. He has many different roles, titles, manifestations, or attributes, and we cannot limit them to three. (4) Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for Jesus is the revealed name of God in the New Testament (John 5:43; Matthew 1:21; John 14:26). Therefore, we correctly administer water baptism using the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38). (5) Jesus is the incarnation of the fulness of God. He is the incarnation of the Father (the Word, the Spirit, Jehovah) not just the incarnation of a person called "God the Son."
What is the essence of the doctrine of God as taught by the Bible - the doctrine we have labelled Oneness? First, there is one indivisible God with no distinction of persons. Second, Jesus Christ is the fulness of the Godhead incarnate. He is God the Father - the Jehovah of the Old Testament - robed in flesh. All of God is in Jesus Christ, and we find all we need in Him. The only God we will ever see in heaven is Jesus Christ.
Having said all of this, why is a correct understanding of and belief in this doctrine so important? Here are four reasons. (1) It is important because the whole Bible teaches it and emphasizes it. (2) Jesus stressed how important it is for us to understand who He really is the Jehovah of the Old Testament: "If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24). The word he is in italics in the King James Version, which indicates it is not in the Greek but was added by the translators. So Jesus called Himself the "I AM," the name Jehovah used in Exodus 3:14-15. Jesus was saying, "If you believe not that I AM, you shall die in your sins." It is not mandatory that a person have a thorough comprehension of all questions relating to the Godhead to be saved, but he must believe that there is one God and that Jesus is God. (3) The Oneness message determines the formula for water baptism - in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38). (4) Oneness teaches us how important the baptism of the Holy Ghost really is. Since there is only one Spirit of God, and since the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, Oneness shows us that we receive Christ into our lives when we are filled or baptized with the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9).
Since the Bible so plainly teaches the oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ, why is it obscure to many people, especially to those in Christendom? The answer is that it comes not merely through intellectual study but through divine illumination of the Scriptures. It comes through prayerful study, diligent searching, and intense desire for truth. When Peter made his great confession of the deity of Jesus, Jesus said, "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 16:16-17). Therefore, if we want to understand the mighty God in Christ we must put away man's doctrines, traditions, philosophies, and theories. In their place we must put the pure Word of God. We must ask God to reveal this great truth to us through His Word. We must seek after His Spirit to illuminate His Word and to guide us into all truth (John 14:26; 16:13). It is not enough to rely on church dogmas, for church dogmas are only valid if they are taught in Scripture. We must go back to the Bible itself, study it, and ask God to illuminate it by His Spirit.
Colossians 2:8,9
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power."
All the scriptures will be shared to help the individual reader about God. This room is not for Debate,We are here to share God's Word in Love and in Truth. Please Refrain from personal attacks. AGAIN THIS ROOM IS FOR SINCERE SEEKERS OF THE ONE TRUE GOD. We must maintain A right spirit,and behave like true Christians edifying in the Word of God and Loving One another. Thank you for your interest in in Learning the Bible . God Bless you.
"Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4).
"God is one" (Galatians 3:20).
There is one God. There is only one God. This doctrine is central to the Bible message, for both the Old Testament and the New Testament teach it plainly and emphatically. Despite the simplicity of this message and the clarity with which the Bible presents it, many who believe in the existence of God have not understood it. Even within Christendom many people, including theologians, have not comprehended this beautiful and essential message. Our purpose is to address this problem, and to affirm and explain the biblical doctrine of the oneness of God.
Monotheism Defined
The belief in only one God is called monotheism, which comes from two Greek words: monos, meaning alone, single, one; and theos, meaning God. Anyone who does not accept monotheism can be classified as one of the following: an atheist who denies the existence of God; an agnostic - one who asserts that the existence of God is unknown and probably unknowable; a pantheist - one who equates God with nature or the forces of the universe; or a polytheist - one who believes in more than one God. Ditheism, the belief in two gods, is a form of polytheism, and so is tritheism, the belief in three gods. Among the major religions of the world, three are monotheistic: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.
Within the ranks of those labelling themselves Christian, however, there are several divergent views as to the nature of the Godhead. One view, called trinitarianism, asserts that there are three distinct persons in the Godhead - God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost - but yet one God.
Within the ranks of trinitarianism, one can discern two extreme tendencies. On the one hand, some trinitarians emphasize the unity of God without having a carefully developed understanding of what is meant by three distinct persons in the Godhead. On the other hand, other trinitarians emphasize the threeness of the trinity to the point that they believe in three self-conscious beings, and their view is essentially tritheistic.
In addition to trinitarianism, there is the doctrine of binitarianism, which does not classify the Holy Ghost as a separate person but asserts belief in two persons in the Godhead.
Many monotheists have pointed out that both trinitarianism and binitarianism weaken the strict monotheism taught by the Bible. They insist that the Godhead cannot be divided into persons and that God is absolutely one.
These believers in strict monotheism fall into two classes. One class asserts that there is only one God, but does so by denying, in one way or another, the full deity of Jesus Christ. This view was represented in early church history by the dynamic monarchians, such as Paul of Samosata, and by the Arians, led by Arius. These groups relegated Jesus to the position of a created god, subordinate god, junior god, or demigod.
The second class of true monotheists believes in one God, but further believes that the fulness of the Godhead is manifested in Jesus Christ. They believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are manifestations, modes, offices, or relationships that the one God has displayed to man. Church historians have used the terms modalism and modalistic monarchianism to describe this view as held by such early church leaders as Noetus, Praxeas, and Sabellius. (See Chapter 10 - ONENESS BELIEVERS IN CHURCH HISTORY.) In the twentieth century, those who believe in both the indivisible oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ frequently use the term Oneness to describe their belief. They also use the terms One God and Jesus Name as adjectives to label themselves, while opponents sometimes use the misleading or derogatory designations "Jesus Only" and "New Issue." (The label "Jesus Only" is misleading because to trinitarians it implies a denial of the Father and the Holy Spirit. However, Oneness believers do not deny the Father and Spirit, but rather see Father and Spirit as different roles of the One God who is the Spirit of Jesus.)
In summary, Christendom has produced four basic views of the Godhead: (1) trinitarianism, (2) binitarianism, (3) strict monotheism with a denial of the full deity of Jesus Christ, and (4) strict monotheism with an affirmation of the full deity of Jesus Christ, or Oneness.
Having surveyed the range of human beliefs about the Godhead, let us look at what the Word of God - the Bible - has to say on the subject.
The Old Testament Teaches That There Is But One God
The classic expression of the doctrine of one God is found in Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is one LORD." This verse of Scripture has become the most distinctive and important statement of faith for the Jews. They call it the Shema, after the first word of the phrase in Hebrew, and they often quote it in English as "Hear, O Israel, the LORD is our God, the LORD is one." (See also the NIV.) Traditionally, a devout Jew always tried to make this confession of faith just before death.
In Deuteronomy 6:5, God followed the announcement of the preceding verse with a command that requires total belief in and love for Him as the one and only God: "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." We should notice the importance which God attaches to Deuteronomy 6:4-5. He commands that these verses be placed in the heart (verse 6), taught to the children throughout the day (verse 7), bound on the hand and forehead (verse 8), and written on the posts and gates of houses (verse 9).
Orthodox Jews literally obey these commands today by binding tefillin (phylacteries) on their left forearms and on their foreheads when they pray, and by placing mezuzzah on their doors and gates. (Teffilin are small boxes tied to the body by leather straps, and mezuzzah are scroll-shaped containers.) Inside both types of containers are verses of Scripture handwritten in black ink by a righteous man who has observed certain purification rituals. The verses of Scripture usually are Deuteronomy 6:4-9,11:18-21, Exodus 13:8-10, and 13:14-16.
During a trip to Jerusalem, where we gathered the above information, [1] we attempted to buy tefillin. The Orthodox Jewish merchant said he did not sell tefillin to Christians because they do not believe in and have the proper reverence for these verses of Scripture. When we quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 and explained our total adherence to it, his eyes lit up and he promised to sell to us on the condition that we would treat the tefillin with care and respect. His concern shows the extreme reverence and depth of belief the Jews have for the concept of one God. It also reveals that a major reason for the Jewish rejection of Christianity throughout history is the perceived distortion of the monotheistic message.
Many other Old Testament verses of Scripture emphatically affirm strict monotheism. The Ten Commandments begin with, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3; Deuteronomy 5:7). God emphasized this command by stating that He is a jealous God (Exodus 20:5). In Deuteronomy 32:39, God said there is no other god with him. There is none like the LORD and there is no God beside Him (II Samuel 7:22; I Chronicles 17:20). He alone is God (Psalm 86:10). There are the emphatic declarations of God in Isaiah.
"Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour" (Isaiah 43:10-11).
"I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God" (Isaiah 44:6).
"Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any" (Isaiah 44:8).
"I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself" (Isaiah 44:24).
"There is none beside me. I am the LORD and there is none else" (Isaiah 45:6).
"There is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else" (Isaiah 45:21-22).
"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me" (Isaiah 46:9).
"I will not give my glory unto another" (Isaiah 48:11; see also Isaiah 42:8).
"O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth" (Isaiah 37:16).
There is only one God, who is the Creator and Father of mankind (Malachi 2:10). In the time of the Millennial Reign, there shall be only one LORD with one name (Zechariah 14:9).
In short, the Old Testament speaks of God in terms of being one. Many times the Bible calls God the Holy One (Psalm 71:22; 78:41; Isaiah 1:4; 5:19; 5:24), but never the "holy two, the holy three," or the "holy many."
A common remark by some trinitarians about the Old Testament doctrine of the oneness of God is that God only intended to emphasize His oneness as opposed to pagan deities, but that He still existed as a plurality. However, if this conjecture were true, why did not God make it clear? Why have the Jews understood not a theology of "persons" but have insisted on an absolute monotheism? Let us look at it from God's point of view. Suppose He did want to exclude any belief in a plurality in the Godhead. How could He do so using then-existing terminology? What strong words could He use to get His message across to His people? When we think about it, we will realize that He used the strongest possible language available to describe absolute oneness. In the preceding verses of Scriptures in Isaiah, we note the use of words and phrases such as "none, none else, none like me, none beside me, alone, by myself," and "one." Surely, God could not make it plainer that no plurality whatsoever exists in the Godhead. In short, the Old Testament affirms that God is absolutely one in number.
The New Testament Teaches There Is But One God
Jesus emphatically taught Deuteronomy 6:4, calling it the first of all the commandments (Mark 12:29-30). The New Testament presupposes the Old Testament teaching of one God and explicitly repeats this message many times.
"Seeing it is one God which shall justify" (Romans 3:30).
"There is none other God but one" (I Corinthians 8:4).
"But to us there is but one God, the Father" (I Corinthians 8:6).
"But God is one" (Galatians 3:20).
"One God and Father of all" (Ephesians 4:6).
"For there is one God" (I Timothy 2:5).
"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble" (James 2:19).
Again, the Bible calls God the Holy One (I John 2:20). There is one throne in heaven and One sits upon it (Revelation 4:2).
In subsequent articles we will explore New Testament monotheism in greater depth, but the above verses of Scripture are sufficient to establish that the New Testament teaches one God.
In this study you will find the whole Bible teaches a strict monotheism. God's people have always been identified with the one-God message. God chose Abraham because of his willingness to forsake the gods of his nation and his father and to worship the one true God (Genesis 12:1-8). God chastised Israel every time she began to worship other gods, and polytheistic worship was one of the main reasons that God finally sent her into captivity (Acts 7:43). The Savior came to the world through a nation (Israel) and through a religion (Judaism) in which the people had finally purged themselves of polytheism. They were thoroughly monotheistic.
Today, God still demands a monotheistic worship of Him. We in the church are heirs of Abraham by faith, and this exalted position demands that we have the same monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham (Romans 4:13-17). As Christians in the world we must never cease to exalt and declare the message that there is only one true and living God.
The Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the oneness of God and the absolute deity of Jesus Christ. The early Christians believed this great truth, and many people have adhered to it throughout history. Although in the course of history trinitarianism became the predominant doctrine in Christendom, the Scriptures do not teach it. In fact, the Bible nowhere mentions or alludes to the word trinity, the phrase "three persons in one substance," or the phrase "three persons in one God." We can explain all the Scriptures in both testaments adequately without any need to resort to the doctrine of the trinity.
Trinitarianism contradicts and detracts from important biblical teachings. It detracts from the Bible's emphasis on God's absolute oneness, and it detracts from Jesus Christ's full deity. Trinitarian doctrine as it exists today did not develop fully and the majority of Christendom did not accept it fully until the fourth century after Christ.
Here are five specific ways in which the biblical doctrine of Christian monotheism differs from the presently existing doctrine of trinitarianism. (1) The Bible does not speak of an eternally existing "God the Son;" for the Son refers only to the Incarnation. (2) The phrase "three persons in one God" is inaccurate because there is no distinction of persons in God. If "persons" indicates a plurality of personalities, wills, minds, beings, or visible bodies, then it is incorrect because God is one being with one personality, will, and mind. He has one visible body - the glorified human body of Jesus Christ. (3) The term "three persons" is incorrect because there is no essential threeness about God. The only number relevant to God is one. He has many different roles, titles, manifestations, or attributes, and we cannot limit them to three. (4) Jesus is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for Jesus is the revealed name of God in the New Testament (John 5:43; Matthew 1:21; John 14:26). Therefore, we correctly administer water baptism using the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38). (5) Jesus is the incarnation of the fulness of God. He is the incarnation of the Father (the Word, the Spirit, Jehovah) not just the incarnation of a person called "God the Son."
What is the essence of the doctrine of God as taught by the Bible - the doctrine we have labelled Oneness? First, there is one indivisible God with no distinction of persons. Second, Jesus Christ is the fulness of the Godhead incarnate. He is God the Father - the Jehovah of the Old Testament - robed in flesh. All of God is in Jesus Christ, and we find all we need in Him. The only God we will ever see in heaven is Jesus Christ.
Having said all of this, why is a correct understanding of and belief in this doctrine so important? Here are four reasons. (1) It is important because the whole Bible teaches it and emphasizes it. (2) Jesus stressed how important it is for us to understand who He really is the Jehovah of the Old Testament: "If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24). The word he is in italics in the King James Version, which indicates it is not in the Greek but was added by the translators. So Jesus called Himself the "I AM," the name Jehovah used in Exodus 3:14-15. Jesus was saying, "If you believe not that I AM, you shall die in your sins." It is not mandatory that a person have a thorough comprehension of all questions relating to the Godhead to be saved, but he must believe that there is one God and that Jesus is God. (3) The Oneness message determines the formula for water baptism - in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38). (4) Oneness teaches us how important the baptism of the Holy Ghost really is. Since there is only one Spirit of God, and since the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, Oneness shows us that we receive Christ into our lives when we are filled or baptized with the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9).
Since the Bible so plainly teaches the oneness of God and the full deity of Jesus Christ, why is it obscure to many people, especially to those in Christendom? The answer is that it comes not merely through intellectual study but through divine illumination of the Scriptures. It comes through prayerful study, diligent searching, and intense desire for truth. When Peter made his great confession of the deity of Jesus, Jesus said, "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 16:16-17). Therefore, if we want to understand the mighty God in Christ we must put away man's doctrines, traditions, philosophies, and theories. In their place we must put the pure Word of God. We must ask God to reveal this great truth to us through His Word. We must seek after His Spirit to illuminate His Word and to guide us into all truth (John 14:26; 16:13). It is not enough to rely on church dogmas, for church dogmas are only valid if they are taught in Scripture. We must go back to the Bible itself, study it, and ask God to illuminate it by His Spirit.
Colossians 2:8,9
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power."
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Della Morton on
-
In the fourth century, the Greek word hypostasis was used in the official formulation of trinitarian doctrine. According to Noss, hypostasis was an abstract word meaning subsistence or individualized manifestation. He says, "When this formulation was translated into Latin, the rather abstract Greek for individualized manifestation became the rather concrete word persona, and connotations of distinct and self-contained personality were suggested in a way not intended by the original Greek wording." However, this concrete Latin word was precisely the one Tertullian had used earlier. Another scholar states that by the time hypostasis was translated into persona the two words were basically equivalent, both meaning "individual being."
It is apparent that many people in Tertullian's time opposed his new formulation. By his own admission the majority of believers in his day rejected his doctrine on two grounds: Their Rule of Faith (early creed or statement of belief) prohibited polytheism, and his doctrine divided the unity of God. Our knowledge of the early modalist (Oneness) believers, Noetus and Praxeas, comes from their strong opposition to Tertullian and his strong opposition to them. If Tertullian meant only that God had three roles, masks, or manifestations, there would be no conflict with modalism, especially since Tertullian did not believe in an eternal trinity. Therefore, we conclude that Tertullian did mean three essential differences in God and that persona did connote or imply a distinct personality, as suggested by Noss. In any case, it is clear that in Tertullian's day Oneness believers saw his doctrine as sharply opposed to their own, which was the majority belief of the time.
Here is one final note on Tertullian. He became a follower of Montanus, an early heretic who claimed to be the Paraclete (Comforter) promised in John 14 and the last prophet before the end of the world. Tertullian eventually began to praise celibacy and condemn marriage. In the end, he was excommunicated along with the rest of the Montanists.
Other Early Trinitarians
Tertullian introduced the terminology of trinitarianism and became its first great proponent in the West, but Origen (died 254) became its first great proponent in the East. Origen attempted to fuse Greek philosophy and Christianity into a system of higher knowledge that historians often describe as Christian Gnosticism. He accepted the Greek Logos doctrine (namely that the Logos was a person separate from the Father), but he added a unique feature not proposed until his time. This was the doctrine of the eternal Son. He taught that the Son or Logos was a separate person from all eternity. Furthermore, he said the Son was begotten from all eternity and is eternally being begotten. He retained a subordination of the Son to the Father in existence or origin, but moved closer to the later doctrine of co-equality.
Origen had many heretical beliefs due to his acceptance of doctrines from Greek philosophy, his emphasis on mystical knowledge rather than faith, and his extremely allegorical interpretation of Scripture. For example, he believed in the preexistence of the souls of men, denied the necessity of the redemptive work of Christ, and believed in the ultimate salvation of the wicked, including the devil. For these and other heretical doctrines, he was excommunicated from the church. Church councils formally anathematized (cursed) many of his doctrines in 543 and 553.
Other prominent trinitarians in early church history were Hippolytus and Novatian. Hippolytus was the trinitarian opponent of Sabellius. He opposed Callistus, bishop of Rome, and headed a schismatic group against him. Despite this, the Catholic Church later sainted him.
Novatian was one of the first to emphasize the Holy Spirit as a third person. He taught subordination of the Son to the Father, saying the Son was a separate person, but had a beginning and came from the Father. Cornelius, bishop of Rome, excommunicated Novatian for believing that a number of serious sins could not be forgiven if committed after conversion.
The Council of Nicea
By the end of the third century, trinitarianism had replaced modalism (Oneness) as the belief held by most of Christendom, although the early views of trinitarianism were not yet in the form of the modern doctrine.
During the early part of the fourth century, a great controversy about the Godhead came to a climax - the clash between the teachings of Athanasius and Arius. Arius wished to preserve the oneness of God and yet proclaim the independent personality of the Logos. Like the trinitarians, he equated the Logos with the Son and with Christ. He taught that Christ is a created being - a divine being but not of the same essence as the Father and not co-equal with the Father. In other words, to him Christ is a demigod.
In effect, Arius taught a new form of polytheism. Arius was definitely not a Oneness believer, and the modern Oneness movement strongly rejects any form of Arianism.
In opposition to Arius, Athanasius took the position that the Son is co-equal, co-eternal, and of co essence with the Father. This is now the view of modern trinitarianism. Therefore, while Tertullian introduced many trinitarian concepts and terms to Christendom, Athanasius can be considered the true father of modern trinitarianism.
When the Arian-Athanasian controversy began to sweep across the Roman Empire, Emperor Constantine decided to intervene. Recently converted to Christianity and then making it the accepted religion he felt the need to protect the unity of Christendom for the welfare of the empire. According to tradition his conversion came as the result of a vision he saw just prior to a crucial battle. Supposedly, he saw a cross in the sky with a message saying, "In this sign conquer." Lie went on to win the battle, becoming co-emperor in 312 A.D. and sole emperor in 324 A.D. When the great Arian-Athanasian controversy threatened to divide his newly won empire and destroy his plan to use Christianity in consolidating and maintaining political power, he convened the first ecumenical council of the church, which took place at Nicea in 325 A.D.
Constantine was no paragon of Christianity. In 326 he killed his son, nephew, and wife. He purposely deferred baptism until shortly before death, on the theory that he would thereby be cleansed of all the sins of his life. Durant says of him, "Christianity was to him a means, but not an end… While Christianity converted the world, the world converted Christianity and displayed the natural paganism of mankind." [98]
By establishing Christianity as the preferred religion of the Roman Empire (which ultimately led to it becoming the official state religion), Constantine radically altered the church and accelerated its acceptance of pagan rituals and heretical doctrines. As church historian Walter Nigg says, "As soon as Emperor Constantine opened the floodgates and the masses of the people poured into the Church out of sheer opportunism, the loftiness of the Christian ethos was done for."
When the Council of Nicea convened, Constantine was not interested in any particular outcome, as long as the participants reached agreement. Once this occurred, Constantine threw his power behind the result.
"Constantine, who treated religious questions solely from a political point of view, assured unanimity by banishing all the bishops who would not sign the new professions of faith. In this way unity was achieved. It was altogether unheard of that a universal creed should be instituted solely on the authority of the emperor… Not a bishop said a single word against this monstrous thing."
Heick divides the participants at Nicea into three groups: a minority of Arians, a minority of Athanasians, and a majority who did not understand the conflict but wanted peace. The Council finally adopted a creed that clearly denounced Arianism but said little in the way of positive trinitarian teaching. The key phrase stated that Christ was of the same essence (Greek: homoousios) as the Father and not just of like essence (homoiousios). Interestingly enough, the modalists (Oneness believers) had first used the chosen word (homoousios) to express the identity of Jesus with the Father. Many who unsuccessfully advocated the use of the latter term (homoiousios) did not really mean that Jesus was different from the Father in substance, but rather they wanted to avoid the Oneness implications of the former term. So the resulting creed was a clear rejection of Arianism, but a not-so-clear rejection of modalism (Oneness).
The original version of the Nicene Creed formulated by the Council of Nicea in relation to the Godhead is as follows:
"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, i.e., of the nature of the Father. God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things on earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh and assumed man's nature, suffered and rose the third day, ascended to heaven, (and) shall come again to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. But the holy and apostolic church anathematizes those who say that there was a time when he was not, and that he was made from things not existing, or from another person or being, saying that the Son of God is mutable, or changeable."
There is no clear statement of the trinity in this creed, but it does affirm that Jesus is of one substance with the Father in opposition to Arianism. There is no reference to the Holy Ghost as a separate person in the Godhead, but it merely expresses a belief in the Holy Ghost. This original Nicene Creed indicates a personal distinction between Father and Son and states that the Son is not mutable or changeable. This last phrase is a departure from the biblical doctrine of the Son and supports modern trinitarianism since it teaches an eternal Son. Basically, then, the Council of Nicea has a threefold significance: it is a rejection of Arianism; it is the first official declaration incompatible with modalism (Oneness); and it is the first official declaration supporting trinitarianism.
After Nicea
The trinitarian victory of Nicea was not complete, however. The next sixty years were a seesaw battle between the Arians and the Athanasians. Some participants in the council such as Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra, even came out in favor of Sabellianism (Oneness). Arius sent a conciliatory letter to Constantine, which caused him to reopen the issue. A council held in Tyre in 335 actually reversed the Nicene doctrine in favor of Arianism. Athanasius went into exile, and Arius would have been reinstated as a bishop had he not died the previous night.
Athanasius was banished five or six times during this period. Much of the conflict was due to political circumstances. For example, when Constantine's son Constantius came to power he backed the Arians, deposing Athanasian bishops and appointing Arians in their place. The controversy produced vicious political infighting and much bloodshed.
Professor Heick credits the ultimate success of Athanasianism to the eloquence and perseverance of Athanasius himself. "The decisive factor in the victory… was the unfaltering determination of Athanasius during a long life of persecution and oppression." It was not, however, until the second ecumenical council, called by Emperor Theodosius and held at Constantinople in 381, that the issue was resolved. This council, held after the death of Athanasius, ratified the Nicene Creed. It also settled another great issue that had been raging after Nicea, namely the relation of the Holy Spirit to God. Was the Holy Spirit a separate person in the Godhead or not? Many thought the Spirit was an energy, a creature, or an angelic being. The council added statements to the original Nicene Creed to teach that the Holy Spirit was a separate person like the Father and the Son.
It was not until the Council of Constantinople in 381, then, that the modern doctrine of the trinity gained permanent victory. That council was the first to state unequivocally that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were three separate persons of God, co-equal, co-eternal, and of co-essence. A revised Nicene Creed came from the council in 381. The present form of the Nicene Creed, which probably emerged around the year 500, is therefore more strongly trinitarian than the original Nicene Creed.
There was one other great threat to Athanasianism. The Roman Empire had begun to crumble under barbarian attacks, and the barbarian tribes on the rise to ascendancy were Arian. Conceivably, Arianism could have emerged victorious through the barbarian conquests. This threat finally ended, however, when the Franks converted to Athanasianism in 496.
During this time period, one other important creed Emerged - the Athanasian Creed, which did not come from Athanasius. It probably represents the trinitarian doctrine of Augustine (354-430), for it developed during or after his time. This creed is the most comprehensive statement of trinitarianism in ancient church history. Only the western part of Christendom officially recognized it.
The main points of difference between East and West on the doctrine of the trinity were as follows. First, the East tended to emphasize the threeness of God. For example, to the Cappadocians the great mystery was how the three persons could be one. In the West there was a little more emphasis on the unity of God. Second, the West believed that the Spirit proceeded from the Father and from the Son (the filioque doctrine), while the East held that the Spirit proceeded from the Father only. This ultimately became a major doctrinal issue behind the schism between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy in 1054.
The Athanasian Creed
In order to give the reader a more complete view of the doctrine of the trinity, a part of the Athanasian Creed is given below:
"Whoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he will perish everlastingly. And The Catholic Faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: The Glory co-equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost: The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals: but one Eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated: but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three almighties: but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three gods: but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three lords: but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord: So are we forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, there be three gods, or three lords. The Father is made of none: neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers, one Son, not three Sons, and one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after another: none is the greater or less than another. But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together, and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved: must thus think of the Trinity…"
-
-
Before I close, we need to answer questions about the so-called Apostles' Creed. Did it originate with the Apostles? Does it teach trinitarianism? The answer to both questions is no. This creed had its beginnings in a more ancient confession of faith used in the Roman church. It was called the Old Roman Symbol (or Creed). Various scholars have dated the Old Roman Symbol anywhere from 100 to 200 A.D. It says:
"I believe in God the Father Almighty. And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; Who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary; Was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried; The third day He rose from the dead; He ascended into heaven; and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost; The forgiveness of sins; The resurrection of the body (flesh)."
This creed was revised to meet the challenge of new doctrinal issues, until it finally achieved its present form near the end of the fifth century. The most important changes were additions affirming the following: God is the maker of heaven and earth; Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost; Jesus suffered and died; Jesus descended into hell (the grave); belief in the holy catholic (general) church; belief in the communion of saints; and belief in the life everlasting.
There are two important things about the original and later versions. First, neither has a direct historical link with the twelve apostles. Therefore the versions are no more sacred or trustworthy than any other writings from the first few centuries after the time of the apostles. Second, they do not teach the trinitarian doctrine. For the most part they follow biblical language very closely. They describe the Son of God only in terms of the Incarnation, nowhere hinting that the Son is a separate person in the Godhead or that the Son is eternal. They affirm belief in the Holy Ghost, but not as a separate person of the Godhead. Instead they place this affirmation together with other statements relating to salvation, leading us to believe that they are talking about the gift or baptism of the Holy Ghost and to the working of the Holy Ghost in the church. Thus, there is nothing really objectionable in the language if we define the terms in the same way the Bible uses them.
However, trinitarians have reinterpreted the Apostles' Creed, claiming that it supports their doctrine. Roman Catholics and Protestants both use it today to declare their trinitarian belief. They have associated it with trinitarianism to such a degree that nontrinitarians do not use it for fear of being misunderstood.
I do not advocate the use of the Apostles' Creed for the following reasons. (1) It did not originate with the apostles as its name implies. I do not want to create a false impression among people by using that title. (2) It does not necessarily emphasize all the important themes of the New Testament, especially some aspects which are important to emphasize today in light of false doctrines developed over the centuries. (3) Instead of trying to formulate a creed that comprehensively states doctrine in a binding way, we prefer to use the Bible itself for summary statements of doctrine.(4) Use of this creed today would associate Me with trinitarianism. Even though the writers did not have that doctrine in mind, the vast majority of ordinary people today would consider it to be a trinitarian statement. To avoid identification with trinitarianism and Roman Catholicism, I do not use the Apostles' Creed.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we see that the doctrine of the trinity is nonbiblical both in terminology and in historical origin. It has its roots in polytheism, pagan religion, and pagan philosophy. The doctrine itself did not exist in church history before the third century. Even at that time, early trinitarians did not accept many basic doctrines of present day trinitarianism such as the co-equality and co-eternality of Father and Son. Trinitarianism did not achieve dominance over Oneness belief until around 300. It did not achieve victory over Arianism until the late 300's.
The first official recognition of trinitarian doctrines came at the Council of Nicea in 325, but even this was incomplete. Full establishment of the doctrine did not come until the Council of Constantinople in 381. In short, trinitarianism did not achieve its present form until the end of the fourth century, and its definitive creeds did not take final form until the fifth century.
*Baptism
Matthew 28:19
This verse records the words of Jesus just before His ascension: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." How do we reconcile this verse with all the later references to baptism in the name of Jesus, such as Acts 2:38? There are several views one could take.
First, one could say the two verses describe two different baptismal formulas. If so, they are contradictory. One must be right and the other wrong, for there can be only one form of Christian baptism. Since God's plan of salvation in the New Testament church age is the same for all people, there cannot be two contradictory baptismal formulas. Since the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, it does not contradict itself. If the Bible gives two formulas, which is correct? Which do we trust?
Matthew recorded Matthew 28:19 and also stood with Peter when he preached at Pentecost (Acts 2:14). The question, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" was addressed to all the apostles (Acts 2:37). If Peter had given an incorrect answer, Matthew would have corrected him.
Some people say, "I would rather obey the words of Jesus than the words of Peter." However, they must rot realize that Peter heard Jesus speak Matthew 28:19, that Matthew heard Peter speak Acts 2:38, and that only seven to ten days separated the two events. If Acts 2:38 contradicts Matthew 28:19, then the first spokesman of the church (Peter) was in doctrinal error, the other apostles (including Matthew) followed him in error, and we cannot trust anything the apostles preached or recorded. If that be the case, we might as well discard all the teachings of the New Testament.
A second solution is to say that Matthew 28:19 describes a formula while Acts 2:38 does not, or vice versa. This is unsatisfactory because the same words "in the name of" appear in both verses. If one does not describe a formula, neither does the other. We have already seen many reasons why Acts 2:38 does describe a formula.
A third answer is that neither Matthew 28:19 nor Acts 2:38 describes a formula, leaving us without any formula at all. This is very unlikely in light of the importance of baptism, the need to distinguish Christian baptism from other types of baptism, and the common sense reading of the passages in question.
This leaves only one remaining possibility: namely, that Matthew 28:19 and Acts 2:38 both describe the same baptismal formula. If true, this solution is very attractive because it will both give a formula and preserve the harmony of Scripture.
A basic biblical principle is that truth must be established by more than one witness (II Corinthians 13:1). Matthew 28:19 is the only verse in the Bible to use the baptismal phrase "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," while many verses reiterate the baptismal phrase in Acts 2:38, "in the name of Jesus Christ." Apparently, Matthew 28:19 is the more indirect passage that we should harmonize and interpret in light of the others.
The Singular Name
Matthew 28:19 describes only one name, for name is singular and not plural. (If one thinks this distinction is not significant, he should read Galatians 3:16 where Paul placed utmost importance on the singular in Genesis 22:18.) Matthew Henry recognized the significance of the singular here, for he wrote, "We are baptized not into the 'names' but into the name, of the Father, Son, and Spirit, which plainly intimates that these are one, and their name one." Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not proper names but descriptive titles. Even if they were proper names, this verse specifically describes only one name, not three. We must still ask what is the one proper name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
The Name of the Son
Without doubt the name of the Son is Jesus, for the angel told Joseph, "And she shall bring forth a son and thou shalt call his name JESUS" (Matthew 1:21).
The Name of the Father
Jesus said, "I am come in my Father's name" (John 5:43). He said to the Father, "I have manifested thy name… I have declared unto them thy name" (John 17:6, 26). The Old Testament predicted that the Messiah would declare God's name (Psalm 22:22; Hebrews 2:12). Jesus received His name by inheritance (Hebrews 1:4). What name did Jesus come in, manifest, declare, and receive by inheritance? Jesus. Therefore, the Father has revealed Himself to man through the name Jesus.
The Name of the Holy Ghost
Jesus said, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things" (John 14:26). The Spirit is given and revealed through the name Jesus.
The Context of Matthew 28:19
The context of Matthew 28:19 gives further confirmation that the singular name of the verse is Jesus. In verse 18 Jesus said, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." Verse 19 continues, "Go ye therefore…" Jesus did not mean, "I have all power; therefore, baptize in three different names (or in another name)." Rather, He was saying, "I have all power, so baptize in my name." A Baptist scholar has said, "A whole group of exegetes and critics have recognized that the opening declaration of Mt. 28:18 demands a Christological statement to follow it: 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me' leads us to expect as a consequence, 'Go and make disciples unto Me among all the nations, baptizing them in My name, teaching them to observe all I commanded you.'"
Because of this, many scholars have even thought that there must have been an earlier Christological formula in verse 19 that was changed to a trinitarian one by early Christianity. In support, they note that the church historian Eusebius, who lived in the 300's, often quoted verse 19 using the phrase "in my name." (He did this many times before the Council of Nicea but never afterwards.) Some say Matthew or an early copyist paraphrased Christ's words or borrowed words from another context. Others hold that verse 19 describes the nature of Baptism and was not originally interpreted as a baptismal formula.
The textual debate over Matthew 28:19 is interesting but not crucial, for by applying accepted principles of interpretation we find that the verse refers to baptism in the name of Jesus. While some scholars see that the context demands a Christological formula, due to their trinitarian preconceptions they fail to see that the existing wording does in fact describe the formula of baptism in the name of Jesus.
The explanation of Matthew 28:19 in The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries is very interesting in this regard: "It is often affirmed, that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but either the evangelist's words put into His mouth, or a later liturgical addition… It may well be that the true explanation why the early Church did not at once administer baptism in the threefold name, is that the words of xxviii. 19 were not originally meant by our Lord as a baptismal formula. He was not giving instructions about the actual wards to be used in the service of baptism, but, as has already been suggested, was indicating that the baptized person would by baptism pass into the possession of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."
Jesus Is the New Testament Name of God
The meaning of Matthew 28:19 is very plain. The singular name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is Jesus. Father, Son, and Spirit are different titles for God. The one God is Father of all creation, has come in flesh in the Son, and abides in our hearts as the Holy Ghost. The one name that reveals all of these roles is Jesus.
The Old Testament predicted that God would be revealed by one name: "Therefore my people shall know my name" (Isaiah 52:6); "In that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one" (Zechariah 14:9). The name of Jesus is above every other name (Philippians 2:9-10), so it is not surprising that Matthew 28:19 refers to the name of Jesus.
One can analyze the verse as follows. Who is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Of course, this describes God. What is God's name? In the Old Testament, Jehovah (or Yahweh) was the unique name by which God distinguished Himself from all other gods (Isaiah 42:8). This analysis led a Presbyterian professor to say, "The 'name' not 'names' of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in which we are to be baptized, is to be understood as Jahweh, the name of the Triune God." However, the supreme name of God in the New Testament is not Jehovah but Jesus. Jesus supersedes all other names and specifically includes Jehovah within its meaning, since Jesus literally means "Jehovah-Savior" or "Jehovah is Salvation."
In the Book of Revelation the servants of "God and the Lamb" shall have "his name" (singular) in their foreheads (Revelation 22:3-4). The name of the Lamb is Jesus, so the name of God is Jesus.
Many twentieth-century evangelicals have recognized at least partially the significance of Jesus' name. Essex Kenyon held that Jesus was the revealed name of God in the New Testament and the family name of God. He taught that using the name gives the Christian legal power of attorney in prayer and applies Christ's redemptive benefits in the present.
William Phillips Hall, President of the American Tract Society of New York, undertook a study of the name of God. In 1929 he published a booklet entitled Remarkable Biblical Discovery or "The Name of God" According to the Scriptures. His conclusion: The Name of the Lord Jesus Christ is the full revelation of God and the apostles correctly understood and obeyed Matthew 28:19 by invoking this Name. Furthermore, the words of Matthew 25:19 "were never used in baptism by the original apostles, or by the Church during the early days of its existence" and "all baptisms of those early days were commanded to be, or stated to have been, performed in, or with the invocation of, the Name of Lord Jesus Christ."
Conclusion About the Baptismal Formula
All biblical references to the baptismal formula, including Matthew 28:19, describe the name Jesus. To be biblical, a formula must include the name Jesus, not merely recite the Lord's verbal instructions. "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" or "I baptize you in the name of the Lord" or "I baptize you in His name" are all insufficient, because none of them actually use the name Jesus Christ commanded us to use. A correct formula would be, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus." It is also appropriate to add titles such as Lord or Christ to distinguish the Lord Jesus Christ from any others who have borne the name Jesus.
The Doctrine of the Trinity
In the face of these powerful points, the only practical reason why some insist on a formula that repeats the words of Matthew 28:19 (rather than actually using the name it describes) is their attempt to confess the doctrine of the trinity. We should note, for their benefit, that many trinitarians see the correctness of baptism in the name of Jesus. For example, the first leader of the twentieth-century Pentecostal movement, Charles Parham, baptized in the name of Jesus although he never explicitly denied trinitarianism.
In recent years, a prominent independent pastor named James Beall wrote a book on baptism called Rise to Newness of Life, which advocates baptism in Jesus' name while retaining trinitarian doctrine. See Chapter 10 - The Witness in Church History: Baptism for a list of other trinitarians today who baptize in Jesus' name. As already noted, many trinitarian scholars such as W. E. Vine, Matthew Henry, and James Buswell have recognized the significance of the singular in Matthew 28:19 although apparently not associating it with baptism in the name of Jesus.
We should also note in passing that there is no reason to use a trinitarian baptismal formula to uphold the erroneous doctrine of the trinity. The word trinity never appears in Scripture, and the Bible always emphasizes that God is one, not three. Furthermore, Jesus is the Father (Isaiah 9:6), the Son (Matthew 1:21), and the Holy Ghost (II Corinthians 3:17-18). All the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Christ bodily (Colossians 2:9). Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are simply three different manifestations of the one God who came in flesh as Jesus. There is no reason, then, to insist on a trinitarian baptismal formula when the Bible does not teach the modern doctrine of trinitarianism.
Matthew 28:19 Teaches Baptism in the Name of Jesus
In summary, below are nine reasons why Matthew 28:19 refers to the name of Jesus in baptism.
(1) Its grammar designates one name (singular).
(2) Its context shows that Jesus described His power and therefore told the disciples to baptize in His name.
(3) Mark's and Luke's descriptions of the same instructions of Christ show that Jesus was the only name mentioned.
(4) The Early Church, including Matthew, carried out Christ's instructions by baptizing in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; 22:16; I Corinthians 1:13).
(5) The name of the Father is Jesus; the Father is revealed through the name Jesus (John 5:43).
(6) The name of the Son is Jesus (Matthew 1:21).
(7) The name of the Holy Ghost is Jesus; the Holy Ghost is revealed through the name Jesus (John 14:26).
(8) God has revealed Himself in the New Testament by one name (Zechariah 14:9) and that name is Jesus (Revelation 22:3-4).
(9) The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the trinity, so there is no theological justification for a trine formula.
The Trinitarian Doctrine teaches that baptism is to be done in the names of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This is also misunderstanding of scripture. The main verse in the bible thay take this from is Matthew 28:19
19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
They will tell you “see that proves it we are to baptize in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost the bible says so“. But, what is missed in this verse is one word. The word ”name” if one was to look at this verse again they would see that this word is singular which shows that it is referring to one name and not three. And then if we read Luke’s version of what had happened on that day and what Jesus actually said in Luke 24:47
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
When we compare these to scriptures we are able to completely understand what was said and meant. We must realize that the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all fit together. They are just each disciples version (or the way it was heard by each one) of what Jesus said. And when combined together they reveal the truth of what was said. That is why in Acts the Apostle Peter preached baptism in Jesus’ name.
Acts 2:38
38. Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Now think about this, If baptism in Jesus’ name was the wrong formula for baptism why didn’t the other disciples stand up against Peter when baptism in Jesus’ name was preached? Why didn’t they say no Peter you are wrong it is this way? Why? Because they all understood it to be done in the name of Jesus with controversy.
I believe that if there was a difference in opinions amongst the Disciples about this subject it would have been important enough to be documented. But do you see anything in scripture about such a disagreement? The answer is a resounding NO. And then to realize that every time after Acts 2:38 anyone who was baptized, was in the name of Jesus Christ. (Acts 8:16, 10:48, 19:5)
Galatians 3:27
27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
This verse gives us the reason why we are baptized. We “put on Christ”. We take on his name. When one has not been baptized correctly they haven’t taken on the name and really can’t be called brother or sister. Brothers and sisters are only that because they share the same blood name. When we take on the name we are covered by his blood.
Ephesians 1:27
27. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Colossians 1:14
14. In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Romans 3:23-25
23. For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Taking on the Family Name
The Bible describes salvation both as a new birth and as an adoption. Viewed either way, we must take on the legal name of our new family. This occurs at baptism since it is part of the new birth and part of our identification with Christ.
A boy in the Old Testament officially received his name at circumcision (Luke 1:57-63; 2:21), and baptism is our spiritual circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12). Certain priests in the Old Testament were barred from the priesthood because they were not registered under their father's name and could not prove their genealogy (Ezra 2:61-62). However, we can claim our priesthood and our spiritual inheritance when we become "registered" in our Father's name.
Jesus came in the Father's name, having received His name by inheritance (John 5:43; Hebrews 1:4), 50 Jesus is the name by which the Father has revealed Himself to us. The whole spiritual family of God has taken on the name of Jesus (Ephesians 3:14-15). Clearly, then, Jesus is the name we take at baptism. If we expect to become part of His family at baptism, we must take on His name.
Power and Authority in the Name
One Protestant writer stated, "To invoke the Name… invoked aid and protection." When we need a manifestation of God's power, we can invoke the name Jesus.
The invocation of a name also represents the authority behind that name; when a sheriff said, "Open, in the name of the law," he invoked the authority of the law as well as its power. When we call the name of Jesus we rely upon the power and authority of Jesus. Here are some examples: (1) Jesus said, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name… "(Matthew 28:18-19). (2) The Sanhedrin council asked Peter and John, in reference to the lame man's healing, "By what power, or by what name have ye done this?" (Acts 4:7). Peter answered, "By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth" (Acts 4:10). (3) The Lord promised, "If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it" (John 14:14).
God makes all His power and authority available to us when we invoke His name in faith (Acts 3:6, 16). When we call the Lord's name at baptism we rely on His authority to perform the act and on His power for the spiritual work to be done.
Do All in the Name
"And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him" (Colossians 3:17). Baptism consists of both word and deed, so this verse applies. Of course, we do not orally utter the name Jesus before every statement or act in our lives. The verse primarily means to say or do everything with the power and authority of Jesus, as His representative, as His follower, and in dependence upon Him.
When it comes to specific spiritual acts that require the invocation of God's name, however, this verse applies literally. We pray, cast out devils, and lay hands on the sick in the name of Jesus, all by uttering His name, and water baptism should be no exception. One who lives by the spirit of Colossians 3:17 as Christ's representative and follower will certainly be baptized in His name.
Not a Magic Formula
The name Jesus is not a magical formula; the sound waves reverberating from the spoken name do not remit sin or bring other special powers. However, when we call the name Jesus in faith, Jesus responds. The Name represents His presence and work. We must have personal faith in Jesus for the name to have any meaning and for anything to happen (Acts 3:16; 10:43).
The sons of Sceva could not cast out a devil even though they used the name Jesus, because they did not have a personal relationship with Him or faith in Him (Acts 19:14-17).
That the name of Jesus cannot be taken as a magical incantation does not detract from the need to invoke the name orally. Peter prayed for the lame man by saying, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk" (Acts 3:6). When the man walked, Peter explained, "And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong" (Acts 3:16). It takes the name of Jesus called in faith. We cannot separate inner faith from obedience to God's Word. At baptism, when we invoke the name Jesus in faith as His Word commands, He comes and remits our sins.
Oral Invocation of the Name
Some contend that "baptism in the name of Jesus" means only in the authority and power of Jesus, and does not mean the name should be uttered orally as part of the baptismal formula. However, the following evidence shows that "in the name of Jesus" is the actual formula:
(1) Baptism in the name of Jesus does mean baptism with His power and authority, but the way to invoke His power and authority is to invoke His name in faith. The authority represented by a name is always invoked by actually using the proper name. All the discussion of power and authority cannot obscure one point: when we actually use a name at baptism it should be the name Jesus.
(2) The Bible reveals that the name Jesus was orally invoked at baptism. Acts 22:16 says, "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Here is a biblical command to call the Lord's name (Jesus) at baptism.
Some argue that in this verse only the baptismal candidate called the name of Jesus, not the administrator. This is debatable, but even so the name Jesus was orally invoked. In general, the baptizer normally invokes the name, but the candidate may also call on the name of Jesus as well, for baptism's validity depends on the candidate's faith, not on the baptizer's faith.
An oral calling did occur, for the Greek word rendered "calling" is epikaleomai, which means "to call over or "to invoke." This is the same word that describes Stephen's oral prayer to God: "And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). The same verb also appears in Acts 15:17: "the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord," and in James 2:7: "Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?" Both passages imply a specific time when the name of Jesus was invoked over believers, which occurred at water baptism. Other translations of James 2:7 are as follows: "[Do] not they blaspheme the good name called on you?" (Interlinear Greek-English New Testament); "Do not they defame the noble name which hath been invoked upon you?" (Rotherham); "Is it not they who slander and blaspheme that precious name by which you are distinguished and called [The name of Christ invoked in baptism]?" (TAB). Thus the Bible states in one verse and indicates in several others that the name of Jesus is to be orally invoked at baptism.
(3) The clear, common sense reading of the baptismal passages leads one to believe that "in the name of Jesus" is the baptismal formula. That is the natural, literal reading, and a person must use questionable and twisted methods of biblical interpretation to deny that the words mean what they appear to mean. If this is not a formula, it is strange that it appears so many times as if it were a formula without any explanation to the contrary.
(4) In other situations, "in the name of Jesus" means orally uttering the name Jesus. Jesus told His disciples they would pray for the sick in His name (Mark 16:17-18), and James said we should pray for the sick "in the name of the Lord" (James 5:14). When Peter prayed for a lame man, he actually used the name, for he said, "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk" (Acts 3:6). Then he explained that the man was healed "by the name of Jesus" (Acts 3:16; 4:10). In other words, when the Early Church prayed for the sick in the name of Jesus, they actually uttered the name Jesus. Likewise, when the Early Church baptized in the name of Jesus, they actually uttered the name Jesus as part of the baptismal formula.
(5) If "in the name of Jesus" does not represent a formula, then the Bible gives no formula for Christian baptism. The only other candidate for a baptismal formula would be the wording of Matthew 28:19. However, if "in the name of Jesus" does not teach a formula, then neither does "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ," for the grammatical structure is identical in both verses. If "in the name" means "by the authority of" without literally invoking a name, then neither verse gives a formula.
However, we do not believe Jesus left us without guidance on such an important subject. In Chapter 6 - Water Baptism, we demonstrated that water baptism is very important, so it is inconceivable that the Bible would not give adequate instructions as to its administration. If we do not have a formula, what distinguishes Christian baptism from heathen baptisms, Jewish proselyte baptism, or John's baptism? If there is no formula, or if the formula does not matter, why did Paul rebaptize John's disciples in the name of Jesus? No reputable scholar holds that baptismal formula is irrelevant or that the Bible gives no direction regarding a baptismal formula. Yet, if "in the name of" does not describe a formula, we have none.
(6) Theologians and church historians recognize that the Book of Acts does give the baptismal formula of the Early Church. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics says with respect to baptism in the New Testament, "The formula used was 'in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ' or some synonymous phrase: there is no evidence for the use of the trine name." The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible states, "The evidence of Acts 2:38; 10:48 (cf. 8:16; 19:5), supported by Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3, suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the three-fold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"
Some argue that "in the name of Jesus" is not a formula since the various baptismal accounts use different descriptive phrases, such as "in the name of Jesus Christ," "in the name of the Lord Jesus," and "in the name of the Lord." However, all these phrases are equivalent, for they all describe the same name, which is Jesus. Lord and Christ are simply titles that distinguish the Lord Jesus Christ from any others who might have the name Jesus, but the unique name of the Son of God is Jesus. Even Matthew 28:19 describes the baptismal formula as being in the name of Jesus.
Conclusion
In conclusion, below are the biblical reasons for baptism in the name of Jesus.
(1) The Bible gives this formula and no other.
(a) Matthew 28:19 describes this formula.
(b) The apostolic church adhered to this formula (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; 22:16; I Corinthians 1:13).
(2) Baptism is a burial with Christ and no one else (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12).
(3) Baptism is a personal identification with Christ (Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27), and His name identifies us as His possession.
(4) At baptism we take on our new family name, as part of our new birth, adoption, and spiritual circumcision. The name God's spiritual family bears is Jesus (Ephesians 3:14-15).
(5) Baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), and Jesus is the only name that remits sin (Acts 10:43).
(6) The name of Jesus represents all the power and authority of God (Matthew 28:18; Acts 4:7, 10). When we invoke His name in faith, that power and authority become available to us (Acts 3:6,16).
(7) Everything we do in word or deed should be done in the name of Jesus (Colossians 3:17), and baptism is both word and deed.
(8) The name of Jesus is the highest name known to man, and everyone must bow to that name (Philippians 2:9-11).
(9) Baptism is part of our salvation, and Jesus is the only saving name (Acts 4:12).
(10) Baptism in Jesus' name manifests complete faith in Jesus as our only Savior and our only access to God (John 14:6-11).
(11) It signifies belief that the fulness of the Godhead is manifested in Jesus (Colossians 2:9).
(12) Jesus is the name by which God has revealed Himself in the New Testament (Matthew 1:21; John 5:43; 14:26).
(13) Baptism in the name of Jesus demonstrates reverence for and obedience to the Word of God over and above human tradition.
In view of all the important things baptism in Jesus' name signifies, why would anyone refuse to use the name? Why would anyone hesitate to take on the name of the One who died for them and be identified publicly with Him? Why would anyone reject the only saving name - the name that is above every name?
So those of you that are Trinitarian reading this please take these things into your thoughts and consider the truth. And please don’t take this as anything else but a truthful help to lead and guide you to more truth. -
-
-
Part I TRADITIONS OF THE EARLY CHURCH
40-60 AD
Nicolas, one of the first seven church Deacons (Ac 6:5) develops and introduces the doctrine of the NICOLAITANES to the early Christian church world (Rev 2:6). In his doctrine based on Greek dualism, he and his followers declared that Christian are sinners saved by grace which meant Christians could look like the world, dress like the world, and live like the world in all types of sin and still remain saved. His teaching laid the foundation for the development of the doctrines of Eternal Security, once saved always saved and confession to a priest while living in sin. Since his teaching required no outward or inward change to be saved (No Repentance), he and his followers attracted large numbers of converts both from the many pagan religious systems of his day and the Apostolic Christian church world. His message to the Apostolic church world was why live in the legalism and bondage of holiness and sanctification teachings of the Apostles when you can be free in Jesus through his teachings?
The doctrine of the Nicolaitans violated Apostolic teaching on
self-sanctification and holiness which was a part of their teaching on salvation. In Apostolic teaching a holiness lifestyle covered standards of dress, types of activities Christians took part in or did not take part in, and daily living codes of conduct. (Ro 6:1, 12:1, I Thl 4:3-7, I Ti 2:8-10, He 12:14, I Pe 1:15-16 + many more)
Of special note. When the Great Falling Away began it started with changing Apostolic teaching on repentance-holiness and sin, then water baptism and Spirit baptism and the application the blood, then to the godhead. All of these gospel of salvation doctrines were completely changed between 50 AD-325 AD by the Nicolaitanes and the Church Fathers. When the reformers entered late in church history they only added greater delusions and went farther away from the teaching of the Apostles in the trinity Christian world.
70-150 AD
The development of Scholastic Theology as a system to interpret the scriptures begins to be used by Christian intellectuals. It is this developing system that results in the creation of the Trinity Christian world with a complete departure from the gospel of the Apostles and the plan of salvation given to them by the Lord Jesus Christ. With the development of the Trinity Christian religious world the gospel of the Apostles is labeled a heresy. In the following scriptures Paul, Peter, and Jude, address and warn of the coming of the Nicolaitans, Church Fathers, Reformers, and many other non-Apostolic groups with their false doctrines.
It is also very interesting to note with the slow development of SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY the receiving of the baptism of the Holy ghost with the evidence of speaking in unknown tongues did not take place with those who were in leadership or those being taught via the NEW study system.
Gal 11:1-10
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
2 Pe 2:1-2
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth (The Gospel of the Apostles) shall be evil spoken of.
Jude 1:3-6
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the COMMON SALVATION (The Gospel of the Apostles), it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith, which was ONCE DELIVERED unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to his condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having SAVED the people out of the land of Egypt, AFTERWARDDESTROYED THEM THAT BELIEVED NOT. And the angels which kept
not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Ex 32:31-35
And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Ye now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. And the LORD plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.
150 AD
Justin Martyr, makes the first change in Apostolic teaching on water baptism and the godhead. Since Justin did not believe that Jesus was God The Father manifested in the flesh as the Apostles taught, he baptized his converts as follows: "I baptize you in the name of God the Father and the Lord of all, and our Savior, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost". Justin believed and taught as the Jews, that the name of God was so holy and such a great mystery that man could never know it. This is why he believed God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ were two different persons. It was this unbelief in the name of Jesus Christ as being also the name of God the Father and the Holy Ghost that laid the foundation of the coming development of the different trinities in the Christian religious world.
I Tim 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
II Th 2:10-12
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause god shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth , but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
190-200 AD
Origen (philosopher) and Tertullian (lawyer) who became believers via the teachings of Justin Martyr change Justin Marty's baptismal formula to just quoting Mt 28:19. In this second (Church Father) change on water baptism the teachings of the Apostles are also rejected and both Origen and Tertullian begin to express a difference between the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as three different persons of the godhead. In 200 AD Tertullian adopts the Roman pagan word "Trinitas" as a description of the three persons of the Christian godhead. Both men at this time developed two different doctrines of the Christian trinity which in fact is not Christian but are modifications and adaptations from the pagan trinities.
OF NOTE: Origen developed what is called the Eastern trinity which formed the foundational teachings of the Greek Orthodox religious system and Tertullian developed the Western Latin trinity which became the foundational teaching of the Roman Catholic religious system. Of importance the word trinity was used for the first time in Christian theology in 200 AD and does not appear in the scriptures. The Trinitarians have always believed for one to be a saved Christian one must be trinity. If this were so then ALL those who follow the teachings of the Apostles including the Apostles were never saved because they never believed in any type of trinity.
220 AD
Origen introduces the doctrine of infant baptism at his pre-baptismal school in Alexandria, Egypt.
320 AD
The Arian heresy develops in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. In the teaching of Arius, the divinity of Jesus Christ is denied and God who was manifested in the flesh and body of Jesus Christ was declared to be nothing more than the adopted Son of God. If it were not for the intervention of Constantine in 325 AD this heresy would have completely taken over the Eastern Church world which later became the Greek Orthodox Church world.
-
-
Part Two TRADITIONS OF THE EARLY CHURCH
325 AD
Under the Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicaea, the Western trinity of Tertullian and the trinity formula of water baptism becomes the official doctrine for all Christina churches in the Roman Empire, by Imperial decree. All religious systems outside of the trinity were declared to be heresies including the teachings of the Apostles and the teachings of Arias along with many other groups. Under Constantine, the so-called trinity Christian religious world became the national religion of the Empire. At this time, the prophecy of the Apostle Peter in 2 Pe 2:1-2 was fulfilled.
2 Pe 2:1-2
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring you, upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth (The Gospel of the Apostles) shall be evil spoken of.
Following the Council of Nicaea the Apostolic church world within the boundaries of the Roman Empire was either driven underground and or scattered by persecution from the government and the new Roman Catholic Church and trinity believers.
416 AD
Infant baptism by sprinkling becomes compulsory in the Western church world.
451 AD
The worship of Mary, the mother of God instituted.
607 AD
Boniface III, is the first trinity bishop to adopt the name Pope in the Roman Catholic Church. The bishop of Rome only makes this move after the fall of the Roman Empire.
709 AD
Kissing the Pope's foot begins.
786 AD
Worship of images and relics develops.
850 AD
Use of holy water begins.
995 AD
Canonization of dead saints.
998 AD
Fasting on Fridays and before Lent.
1056 AD
Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches split over their different trinities, papal authority, different modes of water baptism, and the veneration dead saints and images. It should be noted because of the language difference between Greek and Latin and the trinity difference between East and West the unofficial split took place around 500 AD but the official split did not take place until 1056 AD.
1079 AD
Celibacy of the priesthood instituted.
1090 AD
Prayer beads adopted from several pagan religious systems.
1184 AD
The Inquisition begins (26 - million Jews and Protestant believers will die at the hands of the Church of Rome before it ends).
1190 AD
The sale of indulgences instituted.
1215 AD
Transubstantiation of the wafer and wine.
1220 AD
Adoration of the wafer (host).
1229 AD
Bible forbidden to laymen.
1414 AD
Cup forbidden to layette.
1439 AD
Doctrine of Purgatory decreed.
1439 AD
Dogma of sacraments affirmed.
1508 AD
Ave Maria approved.
1545 AD
Tradition granted equal authority with the bible. (Council of Trent)
1546 AD
Apocryphal Books added to the Roman Catholic Bible.
1854 AD
Immaculate Conception of Mary.
1870 AD
Infallibility of the Pope declared.
1950 AD
Assumption of the Virgin Mary into heaven declared.
1965 AD
Mary proclaimed to be the Queen Mother of Heaven, God, Christ, and the Church.
1985
Pope John Paul II declares that God will not forgive sins directly and that forgiveness of sins can only be obtained through a priest of the Roman Catholic Church.
Part II
General overview of the history of water Baptism:
Day of Pentecost, 33 AD. The Apostle Peter introduces the New Covenant teaching on water baptism (Ac 2:38). In Apostolic teaching water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was and is central to salvation. This is because the Apostles taught their converts that water baptism in Jesus Name is where the blood of Jesus Christ is first applied to a convert. It is the application of the blood in the water that applied all seven functions of the blood to the convert that resulted in the state of salvation for the convert.
Also in Apostolic teaching water baptism had to be done by submersion down into the water. Pouring on, sprinkling, and infant baptism was never taught by the Apostles.
In Mt 16:18-19 the Word of God tells us the Apostle Peter was given the keys
to the kingdom of heaven and how he expressed these keys was forever bound and loosed in heaven and earth. This indicates any change of any kind to the requirements of Repentance, Water Baptism by Submersion, and the exclusive use of the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in water baptism will result in a change to the keys of Peter and will not be accepted as the one pathway to salvation and heaven.
150 AD Justin Martyr makes the first change in Apostolic teaching on water baptism. While he keeps Apostolic teaching on repentance, the blood, and submersion, he changes the words used in the ceremony and he lays the foundation for the development of the soon coming trinity formula of water baptism.
190 AD-200 AD Origen and Tertullian develop the first two trinity doctrines and then develop the trinity formula of water baptism. Like Justin Martyr, Origen and Tertullian keep Apostolic teaching on the repentance, the blood, and submersion, but they no longer use the name of Jesus Christ in the application of water baptism to the convert.
220 AD Origen begins teaching the doctrine of infant baptism because of the perceived doctrine of original sin at his pre-baptismal school in Alexandria Egypt.
325 AD Under Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicaea the holy trinity and the trinity formula of water baptism are declared official doctrine of the empire and the Roman Catholic Church.
416 AD Infant baptism becomes universal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.
During the dark ages and mediaeval times the Roman Catholic Church adopts to additional forms of water baptism. These are pouring water on and sprinkling.
In their church writings they acknowledge these changes came via tradition and there is no Bible foundation for these changes. In the Greek Orthodox churches of the East these two new forms of water baptism are rejected as false doctrine.
With the coming of the reformation movement and Martin Luther, water baptism is declared to have no saving quality and is only an outward sign of an inward faith. This is due to the fact that the Reformers believed the blood was applied at confession and not in water baptism. In looking at the formula of water baptism Luther decided to use the Western trinity and formula of water baptism which the majority of Protestant churches still use today.
REFERENCE MATERIAL FOR THE GREAT FALLING AWAY:
The Bible, Eerdman's Handbook to the History of Christianity, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, The Catholic Church Story, A Popular History of the Catholic Church, Aspects of Pentecostal - Charismatic Origins, The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Encyclopedia of World Religion, Encyclopedia Britannica (1947), The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Religions of the World, The History of the Roman Empire.
The writings of the Church Fathers: "The Faith of the Early Fathers", Volume One; "Readings in Church History", Volume One.
-
Permalink Reply by Archbishop Trevor 'Elihu' Greene on
-
With all that you have taken time to type, I have noticed three things:
1) You type alot to try to educate, however you will ignore a person's comments completely and rudely, avoiding certain challenges to your doctrine by spouting out millions of lines and verses that actually have NOTHING to do with a person's original question to you.
2) You have mentioned the Council of Nicea and have spoken out concerning the Roman Catholic Church numerous times, however you have totally ignored my requests. My requests have been to see what the Apostolic Fathers said hundreds of years before the Council of Nicea ever occurred. I have asked you to place them on trial by their actual words, yet you have rudely and cowardly ignored them. All you did was accuse Rome, and the funny thing was the Apostolic Fathers I quoted mostly weren't from the Roman Catholic Church! I told you to look at of the three disciples of the Apostles Peter and John to see what they said and you ignored me rudely. I doubt that you will even find the courage to do so even now.....
3) You have literally disregarded Greek and Hebrew translation as well as common English terms. This is a common brainwash of Oneness and JW's, all who sit within the same category at the end of the day.
-
-
TREVOR I am Not Here To Debate with You. If I am ignoring you,I am sorry I have got other things to do than To keep going in circles with you Trevor. As I've Answered your questions in the other posts. But you insist Church History Is going to change my mind. MY Mind is made up! I Stick to the bible as the only source of truth!
Your mind Is made up too. You believe what you want to believe, and I know What I Believe. So Please Stop And Open Your Bible and search those scripture out. God Bless. LOVE IN CHRIST Della Morton
-
-
This is not a debate, and your reasons for ignoring questions constantly are not truthful. I stated what I stated, and what I stated was the absolute truth of the matter. You shoot at history, and yet refuse to examine history completely. They are guilty in your eyes without a fair trial to present all evidence. You shoot at the Trinity and deem them guilty without examining all the evidence. we Trinitarians have always stood up and examined our opponents so that we know exactly what we are talking about when we speak. I only wish that you would have done the same.
Are these the same tactics that you would take to try to evangelize Muslims, Mormons, or someone of another faith or lifestyle? I myself have encountered many and have been challenged on my faith, answering all questions. I also present questions that challenge them to either face GOD for real, or turn and run. But I NEVER go in without knowing what I'm going into. I suggest you do the same....
-
-
Some More Great Study Of The Word of God.
Only for those that are sincere Seekers and desire to know truth and that is NOT PUFFED UP.
Let's talk about Jesus our savior Shall We!
The answer to the truth of Matthew 3:16-17 Jesus' baptism and the false claims of it showing the trinity is found in Scriptures. Take a look at these and see the truth of the Oneness of God in Christ Jesus:
Matthew 3:16-17 (KJV) 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Acts 2:33 (KJV) Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
Acts 1:2 (KJV) Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
John 1:32-34 (KJV) 32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. 33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
John was sent by the God of the Old Testament to baptize with water and to pave the way for the Jehovah-Savior who would baptize with the Holy Ghost (Spirit of Jesus - that is why it is called a 'ghost' don't ya know) The only way that John was every going to know who that 'person' would be is God told him the one in whom you see the Spirit decending and remaining on' would be the 'Son of God = Jehovah-Yeshua / Jehovah is Savior = Jehovah has become (in flesh) Jesus
Colossians 2:9-10 (KJV) 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Matthew 1:23 (KJV) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Another fact to remember that Jesus DID NOT NEED OR HAVE TO BE BAPTIZED. He was sinless. So the only reason he was baptized was 2 fold: 1: So John would know He was the Messiah who will baptized in the future people with the Holy Ghost and 2. As an example to us - He did not need to be baptized but He did it as our example in life to show us that we HAVE TO BE BAPTIZED. Same as He did not have to pray - He was after all God in Flesh - He prayed to show us WE HAVE TO PRAY.
In Life He was our Example
In Death He was our Substitute
Another point to thing about is if proving the 'Trinity' was shown at Jesus Baptism then why didn't God record it in Mark? Luke? John? Doesn't the Bible (God Himself) say that it takes 2 or 3 witnesses to express a truth?
Deuteronomy 17:6 (KJV) At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Deuteronomy 19:15 (KJV) One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
Matthew 18:16 (KJV) But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
2 Corinthians 13:1 (KJV) This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
1 Timothy 5:19 (KJV) Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
Hebrews 10:28 (KJV) He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
There is so much more but if people won't hear the truth in simple, plain and short explanation base in and on Scriptures then they won't hear it with volumes and volumes of truth exposed to them like I've already given. GOD Bless LOVE IN CHRIST DELLA MORTON
-
-
Ok Here is a friend of mine Teaching Philip K Panyen (a trinitarian minister) about the One God. 1-19-09 by Steven D. Ashe
Here Is A recorded conversation between two ministers you will find very enlightening!
steven_ashe: Are you here?
philipkpanyen: Yes
philipkpanyen: I am here
steven_ashe: My yahoo crashed and had to reboot
philipkpanyen: likewise here
philipkpanyen: Just got back
steven_ashe: In the Hebrew language they always used plural words to describe God. Not that God was more than one but that in their belief and in trying to give Him the great honor He deserves they use what is called "Majestic Plurality" to describe Him.
steven_ashe: Example in Gen. 1 He is called 'Elohim' which is a word that means 'Gods'.
philipkpanyen: Yes because you have all right to have all names
steven_ashe: But you and I know that the Hebrew people only believed in the one and only single God.
philipkpanyen: Good
philipkpanyen: Friend i like God till i cry at time just to see him
steven_ashe: Here is another example for that same word being used found in:
steven_ashe: Exodus 32:23 (KJV)
23 For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.
philipkpanyen: I am planning to write books praising him
steven_ashe: See the word 'gods'???
steven_ashe: Are you paying attention to me or just typing without seeing what I am trying to teach you?
philipkpanyen: Very sweet
steven_ashe: Are you paying attention to me or just typing without seeing what I am trying to teach you?
philipkpanyen: I am paying 100% attention to you
steven_ashe: Do you see the word 'gods' in the verse I typed???
steven_ashe: ????????
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Here is another verse
steven_ashe: Exodus 32:8 (KJV)
8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: See the word 'gods' there????
philipkpanyen: Yes Example in Gen. 1 He is called 'Elohim' which is a word that means 'Gods'.
steven_ashe: You are not following me, if you want to teach this then you type all you want to as you are losing track of the direction I am going.
philipkpanyen: Oh my friend i am with you
steven_ashe: Then stop sidetracking my direction
philipkpanyen: I am reading through
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: You saw the word 'gods' in both Exodus 32: 8 and 32:23 right???
philipkpanyen: Yes i do
steven_ashe: Read these verses now:
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Exodus 32:8 (KJV)
8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
Exodus 32:19-20 (KJV)
19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.
20 And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.
steven_ashe: Exodus 32:24 (KJV)
24 And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.
steven_ashe: Read those verses and then I will ask you a very serious and important question.
philipkpanyen: I am through now friend
philipkpanyen: I am waiting for the question.
steven_ashe: Ok
steven_ashe: Here is my first question in all these verse I gave you that has the word 'gods' mentioned how many golden calfs were there that Aaron made???
philipkpanyen: 1
steven_ashe: Correct, yet they describe it as 'gods' correct????
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: So that tells me that when the Bible speaks of God as 'Elohim' it does not mean a trinity of 'gods' but a single one God, right???
philipkpanyen: Right
steven_ashe: Correct.
steven_ashe: For the Bible never mentions a trinity of 'gods' or a trinity of 'persons' or a trinity of anything to do with God but does mention multible ways or modes that this one God manifests Himself to man.
steven_ashe: You understand?
philipkpanyen: Yeah
steven_ashe: So, now read my personal Statement of the Godhead:
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: My Personal Statement Of The Godhead© Let me first say that I DO BELIEVE in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/Ghost and I have no problem using those terms or titles at various times in teaching, preaching, praying, writing, or any other type of communications. I believe these 3 terms, or better yet, ‘titles’ are expressions of the One God, not in ‘persons’, but in modes or manifestations of His working, presents and involvement with mankind past, present and future. There is only one God who is called by the title ‘Father’ and only one body/flesh of God called by the title ‘Son’ and only one indwelling Spirit of God called by the title Comforter-Holy Ghost-Spirit. How-be-it there are many titles and various expressions of what God is called in the Bible there is only one family
steven_ashe: family name that is above every other name or title in Heaven, on earth and under the earth that has been given to us to be called by, saved by and live by and it is that one name that we know as the ‘I am he’ and that is the name Jesus Christ. The teaching of a 3 person 'trinity' is a false doctrine and I do not support any false gospel. Galatians 1:8-9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
steven_ashe: I am Apostolic in Doctrine - Acts 2:38-47, Pentecostal in Experience - Acts 2:1-4 and Oneness in Belief - Deut. 6:4; Zechariah 14:9; Matthew 1:23; John 1:14; 1 Timothy 3:16; Colossians 2:9-10 Apostolic means one who believes, practices, teaches and/or preaches the same identical doctrine (teachings) of Jesus and the original Apostles as detailed in Acts 2:38-47. Acts 2:38-39 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
steven_ashe: The New Testament Plan of Salvation is a 3 step process or 3 keys as Jesus gave Peter the ‘Key’s of the Kingdom of heaven’ in Matthew 16:19 and Peter then preached the first full and complete Salvation message in Acts 2 (to the Jews - see also Luke 24:47 = repentance and remission of sins [baptism in Jesus name] should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem), then again in Acts 8 (to the Samaritans) and once again in Acts 10 (to the Gentiles). This correlates perfectly with the blood being applied in Exodus by Moses and
steven_ashe: the children of Israel on their 2 door posts and the top lentil across the door. If any one of the 3 locations was overlooked or missed the ‘death angel’ would not Passover that home but come and take in death the oldest son and animals. Such is the importance of the 3 keys of Acts 2:38, neither you nor I, can afford to miss any one of the 3 locations of the application of the cleansing blood of Jesus for these are the Death, Burial and Resurrection (Gospel) made full and complete in our lives.
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: You read my full and complete message?
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Good, any questions???
philipkpanyen: No
philipkpanyen: i have read the bible
philipkpanyen: and do my studies sometime too
steven_ashe: OK, so tell me how you think one should be baptized, what words are to be spoken over them when they are put underwater???
philipkpanyen: i was baptized 2 times, i was a kid..i cant remember word 4 word
steven_ashe: What was the main words? Did you get baptized with the words 'father, son and holy ghost' spoken or the name of Jesus Christ???
philipkpanyen: father,son and holy ghost
steven_ashe: Ok, let me give you some more Scriptures ok?
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Zechariah 14:9 (KJV)
9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
steven_ashe: How many LORDS are mentioned here and how many names???
philipkpanyen: Okay
philipkpanyen: 1
steven_ashe: 1 Lord and 1 name right???
philipkpanyen: Yeah
steven_ashe: Ok, good
steven_ashe: Now in Matthew 16:19 Jesus give Peter the 'keys to the kingdom of heaven. No one else but only Peter right?
steven_ashe: Matthew 16:18 (KJV)
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Matthew 16:18-19 (KJV)
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
steven_ashe: Right?
philipkpanyen: Right?
philipkpanyen: Right
steven_ashe: Ok
steven_ashe: Now Jesus said in
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Luke 24:47, Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:15-18 that the gospel should be preached first in Jersulam then if all the rest of the world, right???
steven_ashe: Luke 24:47 (KJV)
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mark 16:15-18 (KJV)
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
philipkpanyen: Yeah
steven_ashe: Ok good, you are following my direction ok???
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Peter was the only one with the Keys to unlock the gospel message to the world (others like Paul etc had them later but Peter was the first) right???
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Ok, next
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Who was the one that first preached in Jerusalem???
philipkpanyen: Peter
steven_ashe: Right
steven_ashe: And who was the one that first told the Samaritans in Acts 8 about the Gospel plan of salvation???
philipkpanyen: ?
steven_ashe: Peter in verse 14 - 17
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Acts 8:14-17 (KJV)
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
steven_ashe: Peter used the 'keys' to unlock the holy Ghost for them
steven_ashe: See it???
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Ok, good
steven_ashe: Next
steven_ashe: In Acts 10 who told the gentiles first about the Gospel plan of salvation?
philipkpanyen: Tell me
steven_ashe: Acts 10:25 (KJV)
25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
Acts 10:34 (KJV)
34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
Acts 10:44 (KJV)
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
steven_ashe: You see and follow my teaching of the Bible truth of the correct Keys???
philipkpanyen: Okay
steven_ashe: Ok, good
steven_ashe: Lets review quickly before I continue
philipkpanyen: Ok
steven_ashe: Peter was given the Keys to the New Testament Plan of Salvation right???
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Peter was the first one to teach and preach those 'KEYS' in Jerusalem to the Jews right?
philipkpanyen: right
steven_ashe: Ok, Peter was the first one to teach and preach those 'KEYS' to the Samaritans (half Jew and half Roman) right?
philipkpanyen: right
steven_ashe: Ok, Peter was the first one to teach and preach those 'KEYS' to the Gentiles right?
philipkpanyen: Yes
philipkpanyen: Ok
steven_ashe: So that means that Jesus when He gave Peter those 'KEYS' gave him a very great responsibility for if he got the message wrong everyone Peter preached to and taught would be taught wrong and would be lost due to false information. Right?
philipkpanyen: right
steven_ashe: Ok
steven_ashe: You know that the book of Acts is the actual recorded actions (acts) of what Peter and all the other apostles preached, taught and practised right???
philipkpanyen: Ok
steven_ashe: Good, you agree right???
philipkpanyen: yes
steven_ashe: Ok, good
steven_ashe: Now, here is part 2 of my study:
steven_ashe: Ready?
philipkpanyen: Ok
steven_ashe: No where in any of the rest of the New Testament are there any baptisms mentioned or shown as they are all recorded in Acts only, right?
philipkpanyen: i dont have a bible
philipkpanyen: to check
philipkpanyen: right now
steven_ashe: Trust me as we will discover this fact in this study.
steven_ashe: ok
steven_ashe: ?
philipkpanyen: Ok
steven_ashe: Now, in Acts 2:14 it tells us that Peter stood up with (in agreement with) the other 11 disciples (later called Apostles) right?
steven_ashe: Acts 2:14 (KJV)
14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Ok,
steven_ashe: So what ever KEYS Peter used on that day is the same identical KEYS the others agreed with and used themselves in the rest of the Bible, right??? Remember they are all in agreement with Peter who had the original KEYS given him by Jesus.
philipkpanyen: Yes
steven_ashe: Ok, good
philipkpanyen: Ok
philipkpanyen: my dog here
steven_ashe: Now we know according to God Word that no man can change His Word or teachings right? Once God puts a plan into action it is set (forever oh lord thy word is settled in heaven Psalm 119:89) right?
steven_ashe: Psalms 119:89 (KJV)
89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
philipkpanyen: Thank you so much my good friend
philipkpanyen: I have to go for devotion now
philipkpanyen: May God bless and protect you
philipkpanyen: Thank you so much\
philipkpanyen: I appreciate all you have done for me
steven_ashe: Ok, we will continue this next time if you still want to know truth.
steven_ashe: Jesus Bless you my friend.
philipkpanyen: likewise my friend
steven_ashe: We're just getting to the good part.
steven_ashe: ttyl
Pick up with
#1.
Galatians 1:8-9
1 John 2:19
2 John 1:9-10
Jude 3 2 Corin. 1:13
Rom 16:17
Rom 8:38-39
Deut. 4:2
Deut. 13:1-3
Deut. 28:14
2 Corin. 11:3-4, 13-14
Prov. 30:5-6
#2.
'A Study in Acts - Baptism
Acts is the only New Testament book where any baptisms are recorded and everyone of them were done in the name of our Lord and Savior ‘Jesus Christ’. Also no one every preached or taught in the titles of Father, Son or Holy Ghost at all but in the one name of those titles – Jesus Christ. There is nothing wrong with using those titles in preaching, teaching, etc as long as the user and listener knows that they just that ‘TITLES’ and not the’ NAME’
Acts 2:38 Peter who had the Keys of the Kingdom which were, and are, the words whereby we are to be saved by (Matthew 16:19; Acts 4:12; 10:34 & 36; 11:14), preached Jesus Christ. This is what the Apostles Doctrine was, is and always will be – see verse 42 also Acts 13:12 (Galatians 1:8-9; 2 Corinthians 11:2-3; 2 John 1:9-10; Jude verse 3; Revelations 22:18-19) and also this is where the one and only ‘church’ was born and established - see verse 47 (also Acts 5:14; 6:7; 11:20, 21, 24).
Acts 8:12 Here Philip preached and baptized both men and women in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 8:16 Peter again preaches Jesus Christ and then baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus [Lord Jesus is a shorter way of saying they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. No abbreviations or alterations were every authorized or approved by Jesus or the Apostles. (Galatians 1:8-9; 2 Corinthians 11:2-3; 2 John 1:9-10; Jude verse 3; Revelations 22:18-19)].
Acts 9:18 Paul then called Saul (Acts 13:9) was baptized in Jesus’ name (See verse: 5, 20, 27 and 29; 4:12; 17:3, 18; 18:5; Colossians 3:17).
Acts 10:47-48 Peter preached Jesus Christ (see verse 36, 38 and 11:17; 15:17) and here he baptized the first Gentiles in the name of the Lord [Lord is a shorter way of saying they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. No abbreviations or alterations were every authorized or approved by Jesus or the Apostles. (Galatians 1:8-9; 2 Corinthians 11:2-3; 2 John 1:9-10; Jude verse 3; Revelations 18:19)].
Acts 16:15 Lydia which worshiped God, heard Paul preach Jesus Christ (Romans 1:16; Acts 17:18) the Lord opened her understanding as he did to the disciples in the beginning (Luke 24:45) and she was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:15; 4:12; 17:3; 19:3-5; Romans 1:16; Colossians 3:17).
Acts 16:30-33 The keeper of the prison asked what must he do to be saved (Acts 2:37) and was told to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38, 42) and he was baptized, he and all his family in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38, 42; 4:12; 17:3; 18:5; 19:3-5; Colossians 3:17).
Acts 17:23 Paul preached to the men of Athens who had built an altar unto the UNKNOWN GOD was none other than Jesus Christ.
Acts 18:8 Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue in Corinth and all his house and many of the residents living there heard and believed and were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. (Romans 1:16; Acts 4:12; 18:5; Colossians 3:17).
Acts 18:24, 28 Apollos taught and preached publicly showing by the Scriptures (the only scriptures they had at that time was the Old Testament) that Jesus was Christ (even Jesus told the Jews at Jerusalem to search the Old Testament for they testified of Him and Him alone - John 5:39).
Acts 19:1-5 Paul asked found certain disciples and asked them if they had received the Holy Ghost since then believed (Acts 2:38; John 7:37-39; John 3:3, 5, 7) and they said they had not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost and they Paul asked them a most important question: ‘Unto what then were ye baptized? And hearing their answer preached Jesus Christ to them and when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus then Paul laid his hands (in prayer) on them and they received the Holy Ghost just as all true believers did (Acts 2:1-4 11:15).
Acts 19:13-16 Here even the vagabond Jews, exorcists took upon themselves to use the name Jesus Christ and try to rebuke evil spirits (demons) out of some people who were possessed just as Paul had been doing (verse 12). The only problem was that the demons knew these Jews did not have the authority to use the name of Jesus Christ for they had not obeyed the Apostles Doctrine (Acts 2:38, 42) by repenting and being baptized in His name (this is where, and how ‘calling on the name of the Lord’ is done) and receiving the infilling of the Holy Ghost. So even these false preachers knew enough to use the one and only name of God – Jesus Christ – and not the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. And in Acts 19:17 because of the events of verses 13-16 the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.
"A Study In The Book Of Acts”
How Did The Original Apostles Baptize?© 1994, 2005, 2008
Here is my study called: ‘Who Is This Jesus We Love And Serve’.
Who Is This Jesus We Love And Serve?©
2004, 2008 by Steven D. Ashe and Study The Word Ministries®
First, let me set the tone of this study and my personal feelings of love, friendship and fellowship with all others as long as all are of a honest and truth seeking heart with this Scripture:
Ephesians 4:13 (KJV)
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
I personally subscribe to the following declaration of the things which are more surely believed among us (Luke 1:1 [KJV] Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,), praying that there be neither harmful nor divisive difference of belief to the injury of any, nor the disturbance of the peace and harmony of the church, and that we maybe all of the same mind and same judgment, speaking the same things in love (1 Corinthians 1:10 [KJV] Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. And Acts 2:42 [KJV] And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.) and with one voice glorifying God, to the edification of His people, and to give a true full and complete Christian witness to the world.
My Statement of Faith:
There is one God, called the Father, who manifested Himself in a body of flesh, called the Son, which was named Jesus Christ, and now indwells in us, and is called, the Holy Ghost/Spirit. I do believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/Ghost and I have no problem using those terms or titles at various times in teaching, preaching, praying, writing, or any other type of communications. I do believe these 3 terms, or better yet, ‘titles’ are expressions of the One God, not in ‘persons’, but in modes or manifestations of His working, presents and involvement with mankind past, present and future.
For my complete Bible Study Lessons Series on the Godhead send your request for ‘The Godhead Lessons Series by e-mail to: studythewordministries@hotmail.com
Scripture Base for this study:
John 8:24 (KJV)
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
Questions to be pursued and answered:
1. What name did our Savior come in? Work in? And declare unto the world?
2. What is the name of the Father? And of the Son? And of the Holy Ghost?
3. What did Jesus mean when he said that we must know he is the "I am He" or we will die in our sins?
4. Are there 3 'persons' in the Godhead or 3 'manifestations' of the ONE GOD? or does it really matter if we know or not?
Scriptural Answer:
1. God (the Father) of the Old Testament declares that one day 'all will know His name' and that He is the 'I am he'.
Isaiah 52:6 (KJV)
6 Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I.
2. God declares that in that day there will be One King who is the ONE LORD and He will have only ONE NAME.
Zechariah 14:9 (KJV)
9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
3. The Father's name is what all the family in heaven and earth is named after.
Ephesians 3:14-15 (KJV)
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,
4. Jesus came in His Father's name.
John 5:43 (KJV)
43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
5. Jesus said He was the Father.
John 10:30 (KJV)
30 I and my Father are one.
6. Holy Ghost/Spirit was the father of the Son-Jesus.
Matthew 1:18 (KJV)
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 1:20 (KJV)
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Luke 1:35 (KJV)
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
7. Jesus inherited His Father's name.
Hebrews 1:4 (KJV)
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Ephesians 3:14-15 (KJV)
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,
8. An angel of the Father named Jesus.
Matthew 1:20-21 (KJV)
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Luke 1:30-31 (KJV)
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
9. Jesus name is higher than any other name, in heaven, on earth or under the earth.
Philippians 2:9-10 (KJV)
9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
10. Jesus came in the name of the LORD.
Matthew 21:9 (KJV)
9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.
Matthew 23:39 (KJV)
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Mark 11:9-10 (KJV)
9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:
10 Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.
Luke 13:35 (KJV)
35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Luke 19:38 (KJV)
38 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
John 12:13 (KJV)
13 Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.
11. The Father is the only LORD.
Isaiah 37:16 (KJV)
16 O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth.
Isaiah 43:3 (KJV)
3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.
Isaiah 43:11 (KJV)
11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
Isaiah 43:15 (KJV)
15 I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.
Isaiah 45:5-6 (KJV)
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
Isaiah 45:18 (KJV)
18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
12. Only One LORD, One Faith and One Baptism.
Ephesians 4:5 (KJV)
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
13. Jesus is coming back in the name of the LORD.
Luke 13:35 (KJV)
35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Luke 19:38 (KJV)
38 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
14. Jesus is both LORD and CHRIST.
Matthew 1:16 (KJV)
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Matthew 1:18 (KJV)
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 2:4 (KJV)
4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
Acts 2:36 (KJV)
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Acts 7:59 (KJV)
59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
15. The Father is the only Immanuel.
Isaiah 8:8 (KJV)
8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.
Isaiah 8:10 (KJV)
10 Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand: for God is with us.
16. Jesus is the only Immanuel/Emmanuel.
Isaiah 7:14 (KJV)
14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Matthew 1:23 (KJV)
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Acts 15:14 (KJV)
14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
2 Timothy 2:16 (KJV)
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
17. Jesus did all work in His Father's name.
John 10:25 (KJV)
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
18. Jesus is the name of the Holy Ghost/Comforter.
John 14:26 (KJV)
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Ephesians 3:14-15 (KJV)
14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,
19. The Holy Spirit/Ghost/Comforter was the Father of Jesus.
Matthew 1:18 (KJV)
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 1:20 (KJV)
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Luke 1:35 (KJV)
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
20. Jesus is the Comforter.
Notice in these following verses that the Holy Ghost/Spirit is to come to the disciples yet it is Jesus who is the one coming back to live inside of them.
John 14:16-18 (KJV)
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (Note: In the original Greek reading this verse actually reads: "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another way to be comforted". [W. E. Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words - The word Comforter or Consoler corresponds to the name 'Menahem', given by the Hebrews to the Messiah, so every Jew at that time knew who and what that 'comforter' is and would be - Jesus Himself] and then in verses 18 and 28 we see what that other way is, it is Jesus in spirit form coming back to live within us. Remember in Hebrews 13:5 Paul speaking of the Lord, who we know is Jesus, quotes part of 1 Kings 8:57 "for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee" and by these verses we see that Jesus never left us but lives in us via our own personal Pentecostal experience of Acts 2 as the Holy Ghost/Spirit.)
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
John 14:28 (KJV)
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
21. The Father is the 'I am he'.
Isaiah 41:4 (KJV)
4 Who hath wrought and done itbr/>
-
-
Col.2:9 Trevor read your bible!
Ok you logic makes no sense !! You say: The trinity has three persons and they are all God but not each other? Well Your Saying the Father which is God (spirit)Jn.4:24 is Not THE HOLY SPIRIT (God)? So who is the true Father of Jesus then?
in Matthew 1:18?
If you say God then you are contradicting your own doctrine! Because it's like saying Wendy is my mom. But my mom is not Wendy.
Your saying: The Father is God
The Son Is God
The Holy Spirirt is God.
But God the Father is not God because he was separate from the Holy Spirit A.K.A The Spirit OF GOD!
God the Son is not God the Holy Spirit
Please Explain these verses then: Jn 14:17-18,Eph.3:16.17
Christ in us the Hope of Glory?
Jn.3:11
Who will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and Fire?
God is not God they are all distinct! But yet they are GOD!
Sounds like True CONFUSION TO ME!
Also sounds like three separate Gods if they are not each other!
-
-
I went ahead and read all that you wrote. Though alot of what you said concerning the heresies of the Roman Catholic order are true, you made MAJOR errors from the beginning. This is where your whole message was set wrong, with the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. The Lord called me to study and speak prophetically on Revelation Chapter 2, and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans came about. What is it? Why is it not spoke of in the church pulpits? One reason is that they don't know what it is. The other reason is that many are standing guilty of committing it from generation to generation.
1. The name, Nicolaitans (Nicolaitanes), is a compound word which is composed of three Greek words, and which, because of being a proper noun, is transferred instead of being translated into English. As thus transferred, it is subject to the laws of Greek construction in regard to ellipsis, contraction and phonetics.
2. The Greek words used in its construction are first: "Nikos," of which we use the English equivalents instead of the Greek letters, as we shall also of the other two. Nikos is defined as "a conquest; victory; triumph; the conquered; and by implication, dominancy over the defeated." Another transferred name in which this term is used is "Nicopolis," i.e., Niko - conquest; polis city. Hence, the city of conquest, or city of victory. Also Andro -- nikos a man of conquest, of victory. The second term used in the name under consideration is "laos," -- people, another use of which is Nicolas, which is transferred and is composed of Nikoslaos and means one who is "victorious over the people," the letter "s" being, in both words, the nominative case ending, which is retained only at the end of the word to denote the case, while "a" short and "o" short are contracted into "a" long.
Also, a still further transferred use of "laos" is found in the name Lao(s)diceans, compounded with dike or dice as the Greek "k" is the equivalent English "c." Thus, in the name Laodiceans, we have laos -- "people" and dice judgment, or vengeance, i.e., the people of my judgment, or of my vengeance. Also the Greek word la(ic)os means "laymen," of which laos is the root and stem, which selfsame word, with the "o" short contracted to "i", to which root and stem the plural definite article ton is joined to form laiton -- is a Greek phrase meaning "the laity."
The third and last word entering into the construction of the proper name Nicolaitans (Nicolaitanes) is ton, in which omega, the long "o", is contracted into long "a", thus making the word "tan" which is the genitive case plural in all the genders of the definite article 'the.'
Therefore, we have, without the legal Greek construction, the English hyphenated word Nickos-laoston, but which, with its lawful elisions and contractions, becomes the English name: Nicolaitans (Nicolaitanes), the full meaning of which, in its native tongue and in its ecclesiastical setting, is that the bishops and prelates of the Church have gained a triumphal victory or conquest over the laiton -- the laity -- until they have been compelled to submit to the arbitrary dominion of men who have become that thing which God hates - 'Lords over God's heritage'.
The Apostle Peter wrote against this under the unction of the Holy Ghost in his epistle to the Body of Christ:
"The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. " (1Peter 5:1-3, KJV)
The evidence of this is found in all our common school dictionaries, among which we find the following definition of the term "hierarchy: the power of dominion, government by ecclesiastical rulers," to which the following is introduced in evidence:
"If anyone shall say that there is not in the Catholic Church a hierarchy established by the divine ordination, consisting of bishops, presbyters and ministers, let him be anathema, Council of Trent (trans) XXIII 6." (Century Dictionary.)
In other words, let anyone who will have the temerity to say there is not a hierarchy, not a collection of human beings, who have been given the power, by other men of dominion, as ecclesiastical rulers over churchmen, who are declared God's heritage, let that man be accursed; i.e., let death and hell and the devil get him. Surely, the thing in which that ecclesiastical company is glorying is their shame!
Furthermore, Webster defines the word "episcopal" as
"the power of government, belonging to, or invested in, bishops or prelates. Government of the church by bishops." Also "In episcopacy, the order of bishops is superior to the other clergy, and has exclusive power to confer orders."
In this definition it is affirmed that a certain portion of presbyters (elders) were even "in apostolic times superior in authority to ordinary presbyters," and also mentions the fact that episcopacy recognizes "episcopal rank" which is created by the institution thus governed; all of which affirms that any church in which episcopal government obtains is practicing the very carnal and fleshly iniquity of creating "Superiors" in what should be a holy brotherhood. The use of this appellation makes "inferiors" out of "brethren" who are in the selfsame clergy.
The approbation of "ordinary elders" demands a "set" of elders who are super-ordinary, thus creating "rank" (caste) in the otherwise Divine brotherhood, all of which destroys holy fellowship, creates division and strife, and fosters envy. No marvel that our Lord should hate a thing like that, condemn it, and demand that those who are guilty shall repent.
Why is this of significance? You used the doctrine of the Nicolaitans to say that this was the downfall and entrance of the Trinity doctrine. This is totally wrong! Secondly, you jumped from 70 AD to 150 AD without actually discussing what the Apostolic Fathers were taught by the Apostles. Three men most notably stand out: Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp of Smyrna. These Clement was trained and ordained by Apostle Peter himself; Ignatius and Polycarp were trained by Apostle John. These three men spoke clearly about the Triune GOD, and Ignatius directly attacked the doctrine of claiming that JESUS was both FATHER Son and HOLY SPIRIT. He was the Bishop of Antioch, ordained by Peter and trained by John, so lets see what he had to say:
I therefore, yet not I, but the love of Jesus Christ, “entreat you that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment.” For there are some vain talkers and deceivers, not Christians, but Christ-betrayers, bearing about the name of Christ in deceit, and “corrupting the word” of the Gospel; while they intermix the poison of their deceit with their persuasive talk, as if they mingled aconite with sweet wine, that so he who drinks, being deceived in his taste by the very great sweetness of the draught, may incautiously meet with his death. One of the ancients gives us this advice, “Let no man be called good who mixes good with evil.”
For they speak of Christ, not that they may preach Christ, but that they may reject Christ; and the speak of the law, not that they may establish the law, but that they may proclaim things contrary to it. For they alienate Christ from the Father and the law from Christ. They also calumniate his being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross, they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists. Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power.
- Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, chapter VI.
It is nothing short of being a damnable doctrine which they believe. This apostate doctrine of a oneness of God, as if He were only but one person, was actually present during the days of the early church. It was denounced as false doctrine and those who professed it were exposed as deceivers, not just by one, but by two prominent early church writers: Iganatius (A.D. 30-107) and Justin Martyr (A.D. 110-165).
There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracles, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honor. For there is but One that became incarnate and that neither the father nor the Paraclete, but the Son only, [who became so] not in appearance or imagination, but in reality. For "the Word became flesh."
- from the Epistle of Ignatius to the Philippians, chapters II & III.
-
-
Trevor,Thanks for the history lessons! Now It's Time To Worship the King Of Kings. God Bless!
HALLELUJAH!! PRAISE THE LORD! (Dancing and Praising God!)
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
